0:00
Hello guys and gals. Me, Mudahar, and you caught me in the middle of the night playing some SoCom 2 on the old
0:07
PlayStation. Now, you know what is a You would think that a 20 plus year old game
0:12
probably has nobody playing online. And you're actually almost right about it. There's actually a community of like 20,
0:17
30 people that come together probably every night to play the super old PS2 game. And uh I decided to modify my
0:25
PlayStation 2, change some settings around, and connect to the server and have a good fun night. And you know
0:31
what, ladies and gentlemen, it's it's possible because this game isn't dead. I can't say that for every single game
0:37
that we've played, but if you know me, game preservation is really important.
0:43
And obviously, campaigns like Stop Killing Games are something I want to promote. Now, this is like the third
0:48
video very recently that I've talked about this. And if you're wondering why I'm super passionate, it's because I
0:54
actually think Stop Killing Games can change the way gaming is preserved in
0:59
the future. But I do want to make this video as sort of a video that shows you examples of games being preserved. I
1:06
actually want to deconstruct a lot of Pirate Software's words and basically show why Stop Killing Games actually
1:12
matters and why we shouldn't give up on this initiative just because some people want to be contrarians. Now, if you go
1:19
to stopkillinggames.com, you will notice that it has, as of right now, about 695,000 signatures, meaning
1:27
that this initiative is climbing incredibly fast. By the time we're finished this video, we might even get
1:32
closer to 70%. Who knows, I'll actually look back at this by the time we're signing off. Now, for anybody that, you
1:38
know, needs a quick rundown of what's been going on, obviously Ross from Aursed Farms made a video about a week
1:45
ago where he talked about Stop Killing Games and how they were on the last leg of the initiative. In fact, right now,
1:50
it is the last month for this initiative, meaning that we literally just have a month to get those
1:56
signatures. Now, it doesn't matter if you get the 9999,999 signatures, you need the full million.
2:03
So, a big question is obviously for anybody in my audience that's from the EU or the United Kingdom, there will be
2:09
links in the description below that you can go to which allow you to sign up and get those signatures. And again, only do
2:16
this if you're from those areas. Please do not falsely fill out signatures if you don't actually belong in those
2:22
areas. There is nothing more detrimental to this campaign than doing something like that. So ladies and gentlemen, just
2:29
remember if you got friends and family, even if they don't play video games, this initiative actually goes far beyond
2:35
video games and has the implications of doing way more. Now the reason why this initiative matters for all of us is that
2:42
Europe represents around 15% of the world's GDP, meaning it's not an irrelevant economy. If something happens
2:49
in Europe where game companies are effectively forced to give us end of life plans, they will have to
2:55
effectively downstream this to the entire world. So whether you live in the United States, whether you live in Canada, whether you live in India,
3:01
whether you live anywhere in the world, you will be benefited from European
3:07
actions and regulations. Just understand that again, if game companies, you know,
3:12
unless they're being deliberately malicious, when a game ends, you can play that game at its end of life. And
3:18
even if it's locked to the European Union, nothing stops you from downloading the end of life build from
3:24
Europe and using it anywhere else in the world. So, we all benefit. Unfortunately
3:29
though, only the EU can sign. So, again, Ross from Recursed Farms made a video about a week ago where he talked about
3:35
Stop Killing Games. They're on the end of this journey, and a big part of his video was talking about Pirate Software
3:40
and his unfortunate negative attitude regarding this actual thing. Now, no one
3:45
should sign an initiative or be part of something just because the blind majority say so. If this initiative has
3:51
problems, it's good to point them out. My only problem with it is I feel like Pirate Software has done a lot of the
3:57
negative contrarianism without actually giving cogent points on why he's been
4:02
negative about it. And I'm not somebody that's a game developer, but I am somebody that is a programmer. I know my
4:08
way around code. And honestly, the more I revisit a lot of Pirate Software's words, the more I wonder why are you so
4:15
against something that is entirely possible. So, I wanted to make this video a set of examples and I want to
4:21
show you a lot of projects that are centered around game preservation. So, I want to start off by saying that yes,
4:27
there are multiple types of games, right? And one of the things that obviously we don't need to really talk
4:32
about are single player things. So, for instance, playing games like Shinmeiggami Tensei 3, Nocturn, for
4:37
instance, a game that is purely a single player experience, as are many offline single player experiences. Doesn't even
4:43
have to be something from the PS2 era. You could literally be talking about a game right now. PlayStation 5 Dead Straining 2 games are again, you know,
4:51
offline only. Games that are single player, fully on disk titles, you know, full experiences are obviously exempt
4:57
from this discussion. Those games will never die as long as we have emulators and even original hardware that exists.
5:04
Primarily, the games that are being targeted here are games that are online only with a singleplayer attachment to
5:10
them. So games like The Crew, which mostly could be played offline because that's a majority of its content, but
5:17
arbitrarily require connection to Ubisoft servers, and once that connection is gone, as is the game, it
5:23
as is the access for the game that you paid for, which gets removed from your library. Now, a lot of companies are
5:30
completely okay with stuffing actual clauses in their user agreements which
5:35
state that they can take your game away at any point, which we saw with games or, you know, companies like Blizzard.
5:41
Now, this is not okay. And again, I don't think that this would be a super huge issue. And where Thor would be
5:47
right in this entire, you know, initiative being wrong is if game companies had to actually even advertise
5:54
that you weren't even buying a video game. you were just renting it all along. I seriously always go back to
6:00
this example because imagine if you went on Steam and you wanted to buy a game like Hell Divers 2, which is a live
6:06
service game. Uh imagine if instead of the buy option, you just saw the words you're renting Hell Divers 2 and at any
6:12
moment it could be taken away. Could you imagine an impact of sales at that point if game companies were required to tell
6:18
you that the game you were purchasing was just a rental? That's not what game companies do. Game companies will tell
6:25
you that you're outright buying a game. And even if that game is an MMO or a single player game with an online only
6:31
attachment, or it has a mixture of multiplayer, single player, game companies can just take that away from
6:36
you without any actual protection for the game, you know, player. So, we as gamers lose the history and memories of
6:43
the games that we enjoy and love, and there's just nothing we can do about it. Game companies are totally okay with
6:49
selling us, you know, games that basically are just licenses, but I don't
6:54
think the broader community really understands that what they have is just a license. If people knew that all they
7:00
were buying were rentals, then I'm sure they probably wouldn't be buying a lot of games that they do. Imagine if every
7:06
Blu-ray or DVD you purchased just said it's all a rental. At any moment, this
7:12
movie can be revoked from you. Imagine if a piece of music that you bought could be revoked at any moment from your
7:18
possession. That's the same thing happening with video games and it's not okay. Now, to show you some of the
7:24
actual cool projects that exist, the footage you're seeing is Guns. Now, this is from a server called Freestyle Guns,
7:30
which has around 100 people playing. Now, Guns in my last video I talked about used to be this big like MMO back
7:36
in the day or like this big, you know, online shooter back in the days of JJI. Now, since it's been officially debunked
7:42
and it has a, you know, a resurgence coming up, like they're about to re-release this game, you can play it
7:47
right now through a private server, which which is where I got this footage from. But let's say you want to play
7:53
older games like Socom 2 that actually had their online services completely shut down back in 2012. Well, through a
7:59
community called PS Rewired, you can actually go through an official piece of
8:05
hardware. So whether you have a real PS2 or through an emulator, you can modify some network settings around and play
8:11
these games as they once were. So this footage of Socom 2 was literally recorded a few days ago underneath
8:19
actual PlayStation 2 emulation. And this works between real hardware and emulation. Now even beyond just SOCOM 2,
8:27
another game that I wanted to try out was Metal Gear Online 2. Now, I used to play this back in 2008, and obviously
8:34
Konami has long since shut down the multiplayer services. In fact, you can't even get Metal Gear Online with newer
8:42
copies of MGS4. So, provided you have a old day one build, you can rip the online files out of it and use
8:48
specialized software to actually play online. So, for instance, I was able to download this from Save MG2. I can make
8:56
an account where there's about 50 people on average playing the game at any given moment, which doesn't seem like a lot,
9:02
but it's a small but budding community. And over here, all you can do is download a customized RPCS3 emulator or
9:09
if you have a jailbroken and maybe even an official PS3, you can play this game
9:14
as it, you know, originally released. And it's quite a lot of fun. Even though the skill gap is pretty huge, like
9:20
generally the people playing this game are those people that are just gottier experts. But if you give it a chance,
9:26
you can experience a bit of gaming history. But arguably when I was filming this video, one of the coolest things
9:31
that I saw was something called Insignia Xbox Live. Now, for anybody that missed out on OG Xbox Live before the Xbox 360,
9:40
this led me through a process where I legitimately like set up a Xbox Live
9:45
account. Now, Insignia is a private server solution where it terms to emulate actual Xbox Live. So, this
9:52
footage was recorded in XMU, which was an actual emulator, and I downloaded it, got my official Xbox dashboard set up. I
10:00
went through the entire sign up process, and then just for shits and giggles, I loaded up Fantasy Star Online 1 and 2, a
10:08
game well over 20 years old. And to my shock, there are still people actually
10:14
playing this game at the dead of night or any hours. Immediately when I jumped in, I noticed some players. We had a
10:20
friendly interaction. We said hi to each other and within a matter of minutes we were able to play this game together. A
10:26
game this old that servers are long dead. The community has banded together
10:31
to bring back old projects. Now, not every single project works 100% and most
10:36
of these really don't have every single feature working. But there are projects like The Matrix Online, which again is a
10:44
incomplete project, but it allows gamers to play certain MMO builds of a game
10:49
called The Matrix Online from I think it was Sony Interactive Entertainment. And even though you can't really do much in
10:56
it, it's a great way to bring up a game from back in the day and sort of see a
11:01
piece of history in gaming culture. And again, these are all projects the community has banded together to create
11:08
and keep games preserved. And if the community is doing this through reverse engineering efforts, you know, it would
11:14
only be beneficial if companies had to have an endof life plan. So people who are interested in these games or these
11:20
games hold memories to you, you'll never actually lose them to the fabric of time simply because that's what big
11:26
corporations want you. They want you to immediately buy the next product and they want to keep this world of planned
11:32
obsolescence alive. With projects like RPCN, you too can actually configure
11:38
other PlayStation 3 games like Killzone 2, for instance, and play them in online
11:43
communities as well. It's all of the stuff that really adds into an amazing
11:48
experience. And to cut back on, you know, Jason's [ __ ] here, Pirate Software's nonsense, I played literally
11:56
Xbox Live on the OG Xbox again. Now, one of the points that I didn't
12:01
like from Pirate Software was this one comment on his video regarding Meet Your Maker, a game with tons of userenerated
12:07
content, where he said, "Without a UGC game, where you make dungeons that other people playing, without that large
12:12
player base, that game becomes stale because of a lack of variation, which I guess is true. A lot of games do end up
12:18
dying out." Now, in my previous video, I talked about Little Bigplet and how there exists an archive of old user
12:24
created content that can just serve as a scrapbook of time. I think we all know that eventually every large scale game
12:30
will wayne in its player base and die. That's just how things go. That's business. That's life. That's YouTube
12:36
channels. That's, you know, just just the just the slow march of time hitting, right? That's how things work. So, it's
12:43
not it's not a matter of like you cannot preserve the essence of a game like this with a small group of players. It needs
12:50
thousands or more active players to give the experience. And all those games that I showed you give you the experience.
12:56
and the essence of a game even with player bases less than a 100 average users at any given time. Now granted
13:03
those games don't you know have a bunch of UGC but again these are online experiences that we all grew up with
13:09
that I think are really important and preserving just the ability to play them is there because at some point maybe you
13:16
would like to go back and see where a certain favorite game franchise of yours went and what the gameplay consisted of.
13:22
And if you can't access it, then there's just no way to experience it unless you maybe watch a YouTube video. And even
13:28
that isn't the same feeling. So inside one of these comments on I guess Lewis Rossman's video, he writes, "I'm aware
13:34
of the process of an initiative to be turned into legislature much further down the road after many edits. If
13:40
people want me to back it with then the technical and monetary hurdles of applying the request need to be included
13:45
in the conversation. As written, this initiative would put a massive undue burden on developers both in AAA and
13:52
indie to the extent of killing off live service games. It's entirely too vague
13:58
on what the problem is and currently opens a conversation that causes more problems instead of fixing the ones it
14:04
wants to do. If we want to hit the niche and terrible business practices of incorrectly advertising live service
14:10
games or always online single playeron games, then call that out directly, not
14:15
just video games as stated in the initiative. So, this is where I do tend to disagree. Calling out video games to
14:22
exist well after a company wants to stop supporting them is the initiative. We
14:27
don't want video games to die. It doesn't matter if the video game is a single player experience, single player
14:33
with multiplayer, forced, or a live service MMO experience. It should have
14:39
an endoflife plan. Remember the thing about stop killing games was it was never retroactive.
14:46
Meaning that no matter what had happened after the initiative was passed and the laws were made, anything that exists as
14:52
of right now is pretty much untouched. But it does set a precedent to go into
14:58
the future that if you're a game developer and you want to cater to the EU markets, you should design an
15:03
end-of-life plan. Remember, the EU economy is like 15% of the world's like trade, which is not insignificant after
15:10
the Chinese and the Americans come the entire European Union. And so, of course, if something's going to happen
15:17
in the EU, it's probably going to trickle down to the rest of the world. And that's why this initiative matters
15:22
for all of us. And if we're going to push even further, it's not just video
15:27
games that are the problem. I think the issue is we only focus on video games here. But let's say that you're somebody
15:33
that loves movies or music. Remember, initiatives like this that focus on preservation matter for you, too. Don't
15:41
you want every single movie that exists out there to be preserved or something down the road so we as human beings
15:47
don't lose any form of history? Don't you want music to be preserved? It's a lot different for movies and music
15:53
because you can just screen record an entire season of a TV show or an entire
15:58
movie. You can rip entire music CDs onto hardware. Hell, back in the day for the
16:04
PS2, you could rip entire musical CDs all day every day. Okay, that used to be a thing back then. Nowadays, not so
16:11
[ __ ] much, at least on consoles. And this is important. But when it comes to things like software, it's not just
16:18
video games. A lot of big companies want us to be locked into this live subscription model. So whether you use
16:24
things like Microsoft Windows or Adobe Premiere for instance, which is a great example, Adobe used to be a software you
16:31
could just go to the store and buy a copy of, you know, for a specific, you know, version of that year. Now you
16:37
could keep this version and install it whenever you wanted to. But now you have to be locked into subscriptions from
16:43
Adobe. And there are times where even if you want to cancel that subscription, you may be subject to absurd
16:49
cancellation fees. Things that shouldn't be legal are now legal and normalized.
16:54
And it's really up to us as a consumer group to at least advocate for better solutions. You know, there's good
17:01
regulations like what happened to Apple in the EU. Apple users are basically
17:06
allowed to install whatever application they want to their phones and Apple is so malicious they geolock that to make
17:13
sure that we in America, we in Canada, we anywhere outside the EU don't even get those benefits. But you know, when
17:20
Apple was forced to basically go into their actual phones and get rid of their shitty lightning cable and give us USBC,
17:28
all of a sudden they touted all the benefits you get with this cable. Even though literally Android users had these
17:34
benefits and Apple was the last hold out and they had to be forced by an entire economic zone to [ __ ] cater with a
17:42
better technology. It's actually insane sometimes that you have to regulate companies into doing just some good or
17:49
to protect the actual consumer which is what stop Killing Games was ultimately about. So looking further into like
17:56
Pirate Software's words over here, he talks about more specifically in the second video, what really are these
18:02
scenarios. So he talks about potential scenarios where a studio could be abused if the initiative was implemented as
18:09
written. It adds new paths for abuse and that need to be discussed to help hone
18:14
this initiative into something that would do good without doing harm. I then explained that very few people in the
18:20
game development space can actually discuss this from the other side due to fear of losing their jobs and a studio
18:27
is much safer in Silent Descent than they are discussing the drawbacks of your ideals. The recent attacks on our
18:33
games is obvious evidence of this. My main issue with this initiative is that it is broad in its approach to change
18:40
the industry in the exact language of the initiative, not the FAQ request that all games stay in a functional playable
18:48
state. That is not feasible for all games at a technical level and could potentially restrict developers from
18:54
making online only games like MMOs, MOBAs, and userenerated content games in
19:00
the future. That list is not exhaustive and it doesn't matter if you do or don't like those kind of games. So, this is
19:07
one of those things where on surface level, yeah, it makes sense, right? Like, why would you ever want to stifle
19:13
an MMO from existing or a MOA from existing or any game with UGC? Except
19:18
that's not what the initiative was ever about. and he's still not actually addressing what are the technical like
19:25
hurdles that you're you you're you're you're stopping from this initiative being passed. Right? So, I wanted to
19:32
look at one of Pirate Software's videos, specifically that second video he was talking about and kind of understand what his points were and deconstruct
19:38
them a little bit because I don't think that they're actually all that valid. Thus, the most common requirement of the
19:44
initiative, which is games have to be left in a functional playable state. Now, what happens if that game is a
19:50
online only live service game? Well, if you want that to stay in a functional playable state, that means the devs have
19:56
to release either server binaries or somehow carve off the game to be a single player experience now. Some way
20:02
to keep it functional and playable. Right now, many of you are requesting yes, I should get the server binaries so
20:08
that I can go and make private servers for this. But that doesn't make a lot of sense in the real world. And the reason
20:13
why is because it leaves developers open to abuse. So, let's explore that a little bit. Let's say that you made your
20:18
own video game and you made a live service game. Maybe it's an MMO, maybe it's something else, right? And let's
20:24
say that I want to monetize that game, but you don't allow monetization of the game by any other party. This makes
20:30
sense because most creators don't allow for that. You can't just take someone else's art and profit off of it. Normal,
20:36
right? So, then I go, well, how am I going to force you to do this? Under this initiative, you would have to
20:42
release the server binaries or keep the game in a functional playable state at end of life. So, I hit you with a ton of
20:47
bots. I hit you with a ton of exploits. I attack your community. I destroy your Reddit. I go after your business. I go
20:54
everywhere that I possibly can to make this cost as much as it possibly can for you. And it's not hard to do this. We
21:00
saw the exact same thing happen in TF2 recently. The massive amount of bots that were attacking the game. This is
21:06
not infeasible. This is something that is very easily attainable today. And let's say that this goes on long enough
21:13
that your game dies because you can't afford it anymore and your studio has to shut down. At end of life, you now have
21:20
to release those server binaries to keep the game in a functional playable state. At which point I take those, I create a
21:26
private server and I monetize it. And some people have said, well, simply don't allow monetization of the server.
21:31
Well, who's going to enforce that? If you want a government initiative to enforce that, that means the government has to build a registry of all of those
21:37
games and all of that intellectual property that shouldn't be monetized and then somehow enforce that. Now, there's
21:44
a lot to unpack there, but I want to actually play everything in context. I don't want to be labeled a clip chimper
21:49
in this situation. You know, I don't want to be somebody that doesn't give you the full context of what somebody is saying. And again, if you want to see
21:55
all of his video, it's completely available on his channel. But the actual example that he talked about here sounds
22:00
a lot like corporate espionage, corporate sabotage, sorry, that's the better uh term. And the thing is, it's
22:06
true, right? Like, yes, let's say that a company, and you know, he mentioned Team Fortress 2, which is a game that didn't
22:12
even have official servers until after, you know, Valve had transitioned things to a source multiplayer framework. But a
22:18
lot of people did get those server binaries and they did host games. And while TF2, yes, they had a bot problem,
22:24
and I believe in some cases they still do, there's a lot of stuff the community has done with those server binaries
22:30
provided by Valve to create an amazing fun gaming experience. But what he's
22:35
talking about is obviously, let's say somebody takes, you know, your video game, they take your binaries, they
22:40
basically attack your game, uh, they attack your game with bots, nefarious practices, and as soon as your game is
22:47
dead, right, because these people have attacked it, they'll release the server binaries. Somebody takes your server
22:52
binaries, they revitalize your dead game, and then inject things like monetization. So again, it's a vehicle,
22:58
I guess, according to Jason, that people can legally attack a video game, destroy them, and then be able to rehost them
23:04
and profit off of the art that another person created, which again, I think is a pretty legitimate thing to somewhat
23:11
worry about, right? Like, yes, that could happen. But he's also talked about what is the enforcement mechanism? Would
23:18
they have to have a registry? And what he's describing is something that already exists. Again, these are not
23:23
situations that are, you know, unavoidable. Companies like Riot Games, for instance, shut down an entire League
23:29
of Legends private server because they felt it encroached their intellectual property and copyrights. And again, it's
23:36
debatable if they did that, but they shut it down using the legal channels. Same thing with Blizzard when they shut
23:42
down World of Warcraft private servers because they felt it was violating their terms of services or copyrights. And
23:50
even people like Pirate Software, who's an independent developer, has at times
23:55
used the DMCA, and it's debatable if it's false or not, to weaponize it
24:01
against people that he has not liked, people that he believed were abusing his
24:06
copyright, mostly his like actual likeness. They took some apparently alleged clips from his stream, used them
24:12
in promotional material, and instead of attacking the promotional material directly, it seems his team went
24:17
directly for the actual developers Steam uh, you know, game, even though that Steam build did not have any of the
24:24
offending DMCA material. Again, if you're worried about copyrights and you're worried about, you know, people
24:29
using things for nefarious purposes, the legal channels are available to protect your game even long after it's dead.
24:36
There are games that have private servers that are still not supported. Nothing would even stop some someone
24:41
like Konami from going after that Save MGO project and shutting it down simply
24:47
because they're distributing Konami assets. But let's go further in. Okay, again, I don't think that this should be
24:53
a cause reason for preventing any form of preservation whether things are live
24:58
service or not. But Jason has a few things to say about live service itself. Let's hear this. So, in the most
25:04
extreme, people said live service games shouldn't exist at all, and the initiative will kill them off for good, and that's a good thing. Well, you don't
25:11
get to define what players get to play or not play. You also shouldn't be able to get to define what developers build
25:16
or don't build. You should not have creative control over the developers, and you should not have control over what is in my Steam library or on my
25:22
phone. That doesn't make any goddamn sense. Aside from that, the initiative does not purport to kill live service games. it would just make it incredibly
25:29
difficult to build said games and add a lot of risk to it. Which is why I'm bringing all of this up and why I don't support the initiative in the first
25:35
place. A lot of people don't realize that this will slowly diminish live service games in the market because it's
25:41
not an incentive for us to build them anymore, which means you get less multiplayer live experiences. And this
25:46
is where I'm not going to mince words. I actually don't see the problem in any of that. I get that he likes live service
25:52
experiences, but if regulation exists to prevent video games from all going into this planned obsolescence model because
25:59
here's the thing, it's a very rosy view that video games are livey, you know, they constantly have, you know, stuff
26:04
being injected in and for some stuff that can work. Like, yeah, an MMO probably needs to be connected online
26:10
all the time, but to not have an end of life plan for when that game eventually goes away is an issue. Now, he does
26:16
mention later on in this video, and I don't need to play it, but obviously I think a big problem is how these games
26:22
are built, right? Like, obviously, if you as a developer came out and said, "Hey buddy, listen, you're just renting
26:27
the game. You're not buying it." That would alleviate a lot of purchasing concerns. But I also think it would very
26:33
negatively impact the sales of a video game if people were just told outright, "Yeah, this is a rental. So, if you're
26:39
spending 60 bucks today, well, you might consider getting a game that'll be around, you know, long after." You don't
26:45
want to get something that has a endof life guarantee. Uh but you just don't know when that end of life is. Now the
26:52
thing is with live service stuff is look if game companies are regulated to again have an end of life plan and that means
26:58
that producing a video game that is planned to be obsolete from the beginning is risky then that really
27:03
isn't anybody's problem. Okay? At the end of the day that should be a practice that isn't accepted in the gaming
27:09
sphere. I get that you like live services. I've played a few live services that I enjoy myself, but I'm
27:15
thinking of the long-term implications of game preservation. And he does touch upon it here to fix something. So, the
27:21
next one is that this is about games preservation and that it needs to happen to preserve these types of games for
27:27
future generations and for everyone to always have forever. But I would argue that this isn't actually preserving
27:32
these games. Social games such as, let's say, Apex Legends require a number of
27:38
players to be in the match at the same time so that you can have an experience that is only able to be obtained through
27:44
lots of players interacting, right? It's a multiplayer game. You need a bunch of people. How many of you have felt
27:50
negatively when an MMO dies or when a live service game dies, oh, dead game,
27:55
there's only five people online. Why would I play that? So, why would you want to preserve a game in that state?
28:00
That doesn't make any sense to me. You want to take down these live service games, put them up on a private server,
28:06
and then play it with a couple of people. You're not bringing it back at its height. You're not taking a snapshot of what the game actually is. You're
28:12
making it limp on in a way that doesn't make any sense. That's not preservation. And for those that may stop there and
28:18
go, "But but private servers going to have a lot of players. Look at all the ones for World of Warcraft." Again, we
28:23
talked about that. It opens up a route for abuse of the developers. Now again when it comes to the abuse of
28:29
developers, sure but those developers can always go through the legal channel as you have when there was abuse that
28:35
you perceived and any large company does that and still does it to this day. But the thing about any of this like you
28:41
know you're not capturing games and preserving them as their height or like whatever that to me doesn't really make
28:48
any sense and I don't know why he harps on it. We all know that games eventually drop off. There are games, you know,
28:53
where live services will come to an end. Nobody's talking about replacing these games as they're active. Again, a live
29:00
service experience we know will choose to end its service, and you should be able to play on those servers as long as
29:06
the company's willing to support them. But what happens afterwards if you bought a game and you weren't even
29:12
notified that you were renting the game all along, you should be able to have some way to access features of the game,
29:18
not every single feature, but enough to play the core content of the game after it drops. you know, because you paid for
29:25
the game. Simple as that. That's the argument being made. And yes, granted,
29:30
I've been showing you Metal Gear Online footage this whole time. Do you think this experience is reflective of the
29:36
game at its peak? No. There's what, 50 people currently as I'm recording this game? Yes. That's not representative of
29:43
this entire community, but it allows the gamers who are interested in this to at least play the multiplayer
29:49
functionality, even if it's not what the game was at its peak. There's a lot of
29:54
games that have been lost to time and this allows us to at least preserve some aspect of the game because the only
30:00
other alternative that Jason is providing is to just let the [ __ ] game die. Simple as that. Lose that aspect of gaming history which I simply
30:08
and millions of others do not accept. And it's not just Jason. It's not just gamers. It's other developers. People
30:14
that are also passionate about video games to the point of producing it themselves. This is a serious consumer
30:20
advocacy movement that wants to preserve video games instead of adding in extra barriers to prevent, you know, video
30:27
games from being made. Again, if you're worried that live service models and MMO models are threatened because of this,
30:33
again, I ask you on a technical level, how does this initiative inhibit any video games? He mentions this possible
30:40
abuse that can exist. And there are avenues for companies large and small to address this abuse through a legal
30:46
channel that exists right now. But like if you ask what are the
30:52
technical hurdles? What prevents an MMO from existing if it has an endof life plan or not? You know a lot of those
30:59
games even the Matrix online that I showed you earlier. Hell, forget that. Games like World of Warcraft, games like
31:06
Final Fantasy 15, hell Final Fantasy uh 11 even, right? A lot of MMOs have
31:12
server emulators or even server binaries that are out there in the world floating and it allows people to take that game
31:19
and actually preserve it or at least have a server that's available long after companies stop supporting it. Does
31:26
that mean that a game like World of Warcraft suddenly just doesn't exist or is one of the most popular MMOs, yes,
31:32
World of Warcraft, capable of providing users with an endof life plan? What is an MMO game that you that that literally
31:41
would be ruined if something like Stop Killing Games existed, right? Would it be games like Destiny 2? Would it be
31:47
games like Anthem? Would it be any MMO like GTA Online for instance that would cease to function if all of a sudden
31:55
game developers were, you know, forced to have an endof life plan from the very beginning of its development? That's the
32:01
question that I actually want to ask. Now, do I think that Pirate Software is a completely malicious individual in
32:07
this? You know, the the part of me that has the best of faith to everyone that
32:13
likes to believe in the good of everyone likes to think that no, he's obviously not a malicious person. I don't think
32:18
he's an evil person because I really do think that he is misinformed and he is
32:24
coming at this from a pretty combative standpoint. Like at some point when you're so wrong, you know, you can
32:30
either let your ego completely take over and refuse to change your beliefs even
32:35
in light of all this new information or you know it's a situation where again
32:40
maybe he is really malicious. Maybe this is somebody that has more of a corporate view of the gaming industry and not
32:46
somebody that believes in the actual good of the gaming industry or believes in consumer protection. Because if
32:53
Piratesoft really cared about the gamer, right, the the video game industry, he
32:58
would not be against consumer protections. Because these consumer protections are not designed primarily
33:03
to ruin or make game development harder for the indie or AAA. It just makes it
33:09
so that when these game companies decide to produce video games, they have an endof life plan. Meaning that for the
33:15
people buying their video games, they can at least feel protected and safe in
33:20
their purchases. And I think that's really the most important part of this. Look, I can talk your ear off about game
33:26
preservation all day. I've done it for years on my channel. But the reason why I'm so passionate about this is that I
33:33
feel what Ross has done, the campaign that he started is that if this passes,
33:38
and I hope to God it passes because it starts a dialogue. And that dialogue
33:43
then involves a bunch of policy makers to think about how they want to craft
33:48
and write these laws. Remember this is just an initiative. We can hammer out the fine details once this gets
33:55
introduced. But down the road, if all of this does get introduced and passed, it
34:00
means that all of us gamers around the world benefit because game preservation
34:06
becomes codified and that's the important part of it. So yes, am I a
34:12
little bit angry at Pirate Software for misrepresenting this initiative and still constantly constantly becoming the
34:19
lightning rod for just not, you know, presenting it in a good faith manner? Yes, absolutely. Do I do do I wish this
34:29
this drama had to exist? No. I I wish it didn't. I wish honestly many gamers
34:35
could look at this without the lens of being combative and realize that consumer rights are just a good positive
34:41
thing for everyone involved. But honestly, the thing that I care about now beyond all of this is that this
34:49
initiative passes. So again, to go back to the Stop Killing Games website, in the amount of time we've talked about
34:55
this, we went up around 2,000 signatures, and that is the kind of
35:00
progress we need to be seeing. So don't listen to Pirate Software. Don't listen to anybody that is riding the [ __ ]
35:06
[ __ ] of corporate game development. Look at the people that are talking about consumer protections and the
35:13
preservation of video games going forward. In this video, I showed you a whole bunch of projects that exist to
35:18
keep games alive and active. But there also exist so many video games that are
35:24
dead. There was a game that I used to play back when I was a teenager called Mag. A 256 player, you know, Battlefield
35:32
like game for the PlayStation 3. And for a lot of the games that exist right now, that game has been lost forever to time.
35:40
If stop killing games passed all the way back then and games like Mag were thought with an end of life plan, I
35:47
could probably play a amazing innovative game. A game that hasn't even been replicated to this day at all. in that
35:54
capacity at least, you know, something like Mag. And I'm sure that for some of
36:00
you guys watching that are younger than me, you probably want to go back and play old experiences. You want to at least give it a try, right? You want to
36:07
at least see, you know, how games just evolve. Even if you're not a gamer, you
36:12
probably just want to see how this technology grew over time. Well, without initiatives like Stop Killing Games, if
36:19
you don't play something right there and then, you might never get the experience to play it again. You know, I thought
36:24
Concord was a pile of dog [ __ ] and most people did. That's why I died in less than a week. But
36:32
damn, would I like to go back and maybe experience it again with some friends for one drunk night? Sure.
36:38
Unfortunately, you can't because didn't come with an end of life plan. Anyways,
36:43
talked about it too much. If you like what you saw, please like, comment, and subscribe. But more importantly, please
36:49
go to stopkillinggames.com if you can sign this initiative because every signature matters. We have one
36:56
month left and godamn do I want to see that signature pool well past a million.
37:02
The momentum is here. We might actually get all the way to the end. If you like what you saw, please like, comment, and
37:07
subscribe. I I am