A three-year fight to help support game preservation has come to a sad end today. The US copyright office has denied a request for a DMCA exemption that would allow libraries to remotely share digital access to preserved video games.

“For the past three years, the Video Game History Foundation has been supporting with the Software Preservation Network (SPN) on a petition to allow libraries and archives to remotely share digital access to out-of-print video games in their collections,” VGHF explains in its statement. “Under the current anti-circumvention rules in Section 1201 of the DMCA, libraries and archives are unable to break copy protection on games in order to make them remotely accessible to researchers.”

Essentially, this exemption would open up the possibility of a digital library where historians and researchers could ‘check out’ digital games that run through emulators. The VGHF argues that around 87% of all video games released in the US before 2010 are now out of print, and the only legal way to access those games now is through the occasionally exorbitant prices and often failing hardware that defines the retro gaming market.

  • YeetPics@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    23 minutes ago

    I don’t think I’ll ever buy a game from a AAA publisher again,they can’t be trusted and the quality of their goods has fallen sharply the last few years.

    Smaller dev teams have better/more interesting IP AND seem to care what I think as their end user.

    • Pirky@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 hour ago

      That’s what I’ve been doing. Been collecting various PS1-4 games on top of GameCube, Wii, and Switch games over the past year to rip and save digital copies for myself. Then I play them on emulators.
      I have roughly a few hundred so far and plan to expand it further.
      I have a NAS with two 8 TB drives in RAID to back them up and it’s already over 50% full. I want to start collecting OG Xbox and 360 games in the near future, but I need to get jailbroken consoles for them.

      • otp@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        two 8 TB drives in RAID to back them up

        Obligatory “RAID is not a backup”

        • Pirky@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          55 minutes ago

          Sure, but it’s a start. It’s certainly better than trying to keep them on my laptop. And I do hope to add more forms of data backup/storage as time goes on. It’s taken several hours ripping all those games and I’d hate to lose them all.
          I also have an external 4 TB SSD that I keep most of the games on (excluding the PS4 games because they simply take up too much space).

  • aeronmelon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    “No! They’ll enjoy preserving our history to muuuch!!”

    They know the dark secret of book preservation. The people preserving the books… gulp READ THEM!

    • T156@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      44 minutes ago

      Libraries facilitate widespread piracy of books, by allowing people to read them without a distribution licence, or even take them home!

      This is a clear violation of the DMCA, and thus must be violated immediately!

      • aeronmelon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        38 minutes ago

        I get the sarcasm even if others don’t.

        Someone else on Lemmy said you couldn’t invent libraries today. It’s true.

  • radix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Actually explains a lot of decisions by game publishers the last 5-10 years if their official position is that games are meant to collect dust on a shelf rather than being played.

    • T156@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      43 minutes ago

      You can’t have criticisms about the game if you put it on a shelf instead of playing it.

  • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    5 hours ago

    They really want to force gamers to buy their new games which are pretty much like the old games but now with extra helpings of ads, gambling mechanics and micro transactions on top

    • zecg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 hours ago

      The stories have also gone downhill to accomodate new bastard genres with fomo shit

    • MudMan@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      They really want to force gamers to buy the old games, just as they were, because those are next to free to adapt to a different platform and people will pay for them.

      Not to be my usual old codger, but a lot of these game in questions were microtransaction-based to being with, in the very Farmville-y format of charging you a quarter for each set of three lives and then being ungodly broken and difficult to make sure those three lives didn’t last any longer than a minute each and entice you to pay for three more.

      This absolutely sucks, is based on unjustifiable logic and takes the side of business over a demonstrable common good, but let’s not pretend the business logic behind it was invented in 2005. Game publishers have been game publishers longer than many of the nostalgic posters have been alive.

      • T156@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        42 minutes ago

        They really want to force gamers to buy the old games, just as they were, because those are next to free to adapt to a different platform and people will pay for them.

        Nah, if they had wanted that, they would continue to release them in that format. As it stands, they don’t, so you can’t buy those old games from the publisher either.

        • MudMan@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          38 minutes ago

          They absolutely do. The market is full of remasters, remakes and re-releases. Having the originals readily available presumably diminishes the value of those, by the count of publishers.

          That is not the same as saying that old games are available. Most of them are not, the market keeps reissuing the same handful of hits and landmark games (although we’re in an era of deep cuts now, we even have a Pocky & Rocky remaster, somehow). But they can’t set up regulations where you are allowed to lend out Spider-Man vs. The Kingpin but not Resident Evil 2, so here we are.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I don’t think we’re talking about arcade games at this point though. We’re talking to a large extent about 3rd–6th generation home gaming consoles. For Nintendo, that’s the NES to GameCube. Sony entered with the PlayStation in the 5th gen, and Xbox came out in 6th.

        I think a lot of people would see this (and to a slightly lesser extent the 7th gen) as the high point where games came out in a completed state and you paid once and the just enjoyed the game.

        • MudMan@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Well, no, we’re talking about everything. Everything before 2010, explicitly.

          I would guess most people just fill in whatever moment of their childhood there was when they would buy a thing and enjoy a thing and not worry about it too much.

          Me being me (see the old codger self-identification up there), I substitute in the late 80s and 90s, when I would plead and beg for coins to squeeze in another 60 second gaming session and then go on to save for months in order to get a lesser version of that same experience at home for anywhere between 60 and 90 bucks (140-220 adjusted for inflation).

          In the grand scheme of my memories, the five years after arcades were relevant and before Microsoft started charging a monthly fee to play online and Facebook started a games division are too short of a blip to consider a golden age. My nostalgia is on ranting angrily about having to purchase Street Fighter 2 for the fourth time and having Capcom re-sell the PSOne version of Resident Evil a third time for the privilege of having added analogue stick controls.

          • Zagorath@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            But an arcade game is a physical object. The preservation needs of arcade games are very different to games distributed on cartridge or disk, which is why I suggested that a digital library would be focusing on home game consoles, especially those released at a time when home gaming was the main way gaming got experienced (i.e., after arcades were the most popular way).

            [24 years is] too short of a blip to consider a golden age

            Assuming that “too short” and reference to a “golden age” was meant in refutation to my claim of the 3rd–6th console generations, which lasted from 1983 until 2007. If that’s the claim, I find it absolutely absurd. When we discuss the golden age of TV we’re talking barely one decade, from the mid-to-late oughts to the late 10s.

            If you meant something else by that bit, I’m sorry, please disregard the above paragraph. But I don’t know quite what you do mean.

            • MudMan@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              52 minutes ago

              No, I’m arguing that if you’re trying to identify an era where the industry at large was not overmonetizing that’s your timeframe: From the death of arcades to the birth of modern casual gaming/F2P/Subscription services. By the numbers that’d be 2001-2005.

              Before then you have arcades acting as the first window of monetization, where a whole bunch of console games started and where a lot of the investment went. After that you’re balls deep in modern gaming, with games as a service that are still live today, from World of Warcraft to Maple Story.

              That’s a handful of years, at best. Any other interpretation has to ignore huge chunks of the industry that were behaving in the same way that makes people complain today. Either you dismiss arcade gaming despite it being the tentpole of the entire industry or you’re dismissing the fact that subscription and MTX games were already dominating big chunks of the space.

              So no, it’s not 24 years. It never was 24 years.

              And for the record, we knew at the time. We’ve been complaining since the 90s. I wasn’t joking earlier, “Ubisoft greedy” today is a carbon copy of “Capcom greedy” in 1997. I’ve been stuck in nerdrage Groundhog Day for thirty years.

              • Zagorath@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                24 minutes ago

                But I don’t think you need to go from the time when arcades were entirely irrelevant, but merely where they were no longer the main driving force. That’s at most the late '90s with gen 5 consoles and many big popular or influential game franchises like Quake, Pokemon, Age of Empires, Fallout, Diablo, and Grand Theft Auto (that’s '96 and '97 alone).

                And you need to go up until at least the time when few of the largest games were available without cancerous monetisation strategies, not merely when a few games had started doing it. So you definitely need to go up to at least the launch of the 7th generation consoles in 2007.

                To bring it back to the original point of the conversation, that’s not to say that it isn’t worth preserving games that did have those strategies of course. It just doesn’t detract from the sense of a period when the majority of gamers’ experience was much better.

                We’ve been complaining since the 90s. I wasn’t joking earlier, “Ubisoft greedy” today is a carbon copy of “Capcom greedy” in 1997

                And EA greedy in 2007. Doesn’t mean that what they were doing then was as bad as what is being done today.

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    5 hours ago

    You haven’t sold this game in 30 years - why do you fucking care you drooling troglodite?