Thor Is An Industry Plant

[@Lackingx]

If you liked this video, you should watch this! kzbin.info/www/bejne/mZXMfqSZrKd6pJYsi=qcO3KpQRbuQY12oQ

[@luckykennedy7364]

Props to Ross for handling the whole situation very maturely and releasing a video answering Thor's questions and then some without even bringing him up directly.

[@GoreGutztheImpaler]

Oh thank you, I wasn't awear thor did that, I am looking it up right now.

[@jeroid123]

100% Ross turned the other cheek and kept moving forward respectfully even after Thor hurled uncalled for Insults at him even trying to go after ross' appearance for no reason especially when Thor himself looks like a goblin

[@GoreGutztheImpaler]

@@jeroid123 I'd seen people say thor said bad things about Ross but I can't find them. Do you have examples?

[@jeroid123]

@@GoreGutztheImpaler he called him greasy looking and that he looks like a used car salesman stuff like that during his livestream i dont have a time stamp if thats what you are asking for, trying to discredit someone using their appearance is disgusting and anyone that does it should be never be listened to

[@AveenFernando]

​@@Duskofoolacile420 youtuber with a channel called Accursed Farms

[@silasstryder]

The best comment I've seen on this topic from @jwueller: Thor has been misrepresenting this massively. He clearly didn't actually understand the initiative or read the FAQ, he doesn't actually understand the EU process, and he argues entirely based on irrelevant US law. He obviously doesn't have a lot of experience as a developer if he thinks making a dedicated server available means re-architecting (and re-balancing?) the entire game. He's worked in QA the majority of the time, not engineering. So maybe he is just out of his depth here. He's basically making up straw men for things the initiative doesn't say, and then complains that the things he just made up don't make sense (duh). The initiative contains plenty of developers in support. So clearly this isn't some impossible problem as he pretends. Note how he also tried to deflect the conversation towards the initiative wanting to kill live service games, when the initiative is just about how its sold and ownership! Nothing is live service specific! A lot of people also dont seem to realize that online DRM is basically just a "live service" too that will kill almost every single modern game once the DRM servers inevitably shut down. His argument about hackers is super hypothetical and could already happen before, but how would you even make money off of it if everyone else can also host the servers, and you just killed the community? Why would anyone pay for that particular one? Its such a non-sequitur. He also has a huge conflict of interest since he's publishing a live service game himself. So you have to take everything he says with a big grain of salt here. He is not on the customer's team! I have been a full-stack developer for over 20 years, and everything the initiative is asking for is very reasonable, and I 100% support it. Also note that since laws are very rarely retroactive, this wouldn't actually apply to existing games, just future ones. Those games would be architected with the end-of-life plan in mind, which would make it very easy to adhere to. Yes, some change from the status quo will be required, but I think the initiative only requires the minimum amount of work that still fulfills the goal. Other software industries have to provide a lot more guarantees at end-of-life than games would. Not requiring any further support makes it basically free if the game is properly designed from the start. Not to mention that dedicated servers just used to be included in almost every game for decades. Any complex cloud architecture that currently exists is much more likely to be self-inflicted than required complexity. And even then, it would not be hard to publish your Kubernetes cluster config to your customers. You could actually run the dedicated server for most games on a toaster. The client actually has significantly higher compute workload due to graphics. There might be exceptions, but servers being complicated is not an excuse to violate the customer's fundamental, constitutional 'Right to Property'. Note that Thor also showed his true colors in the livestreams preceding his edited videos, where he explicitly said that he doesn't see a problem and that devs/publishers should be able to unilaterally take away your purchase. So he fundamentally disagrees with the objective, even if he pretends otherwise. In those streams, Thor also called Ross 'manipulative' and a 'greasy car salesman', despite Ross being nothing but nice. Ross even tried to reach out via comment on the VOD to clear up misconceptions, which Thor shut down. The comment was deleted at some point. My takeaway from this is that Thor is not acting in good faith and we shouldn't take him seriously if he isn't proposing any alternative solutions. The only thing he's proposed so far was to disclose that a game might randomly shut down on purchase. But it's easy to see that this doesn't actually solve the problem of games being destroyed. It just makes it more obvious that you're getting robbed later on. Don't take his word at face value. He doesn't have as much authority on the subject as he claims.

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

Very well put. Yeah to me it seemed liek he had his intentions and then tried to fumble together decoy arguments to support his covert intentions. So he even said he wants us to own nothing, great.

[@ShadowReaperX07]

There's a subtle irony in referring to Ross as a 'Greasy car salesman' whilst simultaneously defending the argument that it's perfectly fine to request a customer to: "Buy this newer model Mustang [Game], I'm afraid we don't stock the parts [Server infrastructure] for that 20 year old Mustang [Game] anymore, and won't remotely entertain the idea of fixing it [making it run standalone/offline], despite having done so in the past, because it won't be profitable for us to do so. But we're ALSO going to make it so that you can't fix it yourself either [Run Offline / Local Hosting / Fan Servers] ... now, how about buying that new Mustang that's very similar to the old one..." Like if that isn't absolute peak projection. This is inherently exactly how a sleasy car salesman operates. Sell a product that is 'supported' Refuse to provide any warranty or support that can run out at the sellers discretion. Whoops you just bought an expensive brick, congratulations.

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

@@ShadowReaperX07 It's being corpo's henchman out of conviction. Real evil right there.

[@christophervalencia5919]

Mofo credited a yt comment. Legend

[@Rodoet001]

Ross's comment on that video, which was deleted by pirate software: "I'll just leave some points on this: -I'm afraid you're misunderstanding several parts of our initiative. We want as many games as possible to be left in some playable state upon shutdown, not just specifically targeted ones. The Crew was just a convenient example to take action on, it represents hundreds of games that have already been destroyed in a similar manner and hundreds more "at risk" of being destroyed. We're not looking at the advertising being the primary bad practice, but the preventable destruction of videogames themselves. -This isn't about killing live service games (quite the opposite!), it's primarily about mandating future live service games have an end of life plan from the design phase onward. For existing games, that gets much more complicated, I plan to have a video on that later. So live service games could continue operating in the future same as now, except when they shutdown, they would be handled similarly to Knockout City, Gran Turismo Sport, Scrolls, Ryzom, Astonia, etc. as opposed to leaving the customer with absolutely nothing. -A key component is how the game is sold and conveyed to the player. Goods are generally sold as one time purchases and you can keep them indefinitely. Services are generally sold with a clearly stated expiration date. Most "Live service" games do neither of these. They are often sold as a one-time purchase with no statement whatsoever about the duration, so customers can't make an informed decision, it's gambling how long the game lasts. Other industries would face legal charges for operating this way. This could likely be running afoul of EU law even without the ECI, that's being tested. -The EU has laws on EULAs that ban unfair or one-sided terms. MANY existing game EULAs likely violate those. Plus, you can put anything in a EULA. The idea here is to take removal of individual ownership of a game off the table entirely. -We're not making a distinction between preservation of multiplayer and single player and neither does the law. We fail to find reasons why a 4v4 arena game like Nosgoth should be destroyed permanently when it shuts down other than it being deliberately designed that way with no recourse for the customer. -As for the reasons why I think this initiative could pass, that's my cynicism bleeding though. I think what we're doing is pushing a good cause that would benefit millions of people through an imperfect system where petty factors of politicians could be a large part of what determines its success or not. Democracy can be a messy process and I was acknowledging that. I'm not championing these flawed factors, but rather saying I think our odds are decent. Finally, while your earlier comments towards me were far from civil, I don't wish you any ill will, nor do I encourage anyone to harass you. I and others still absolutely disagree with you on the necessity of saving games, but I wanted to be clear causing you trouble is not something I nor the campaign seeks at all. Personally, I think you made your stance clear, you're not going to change your mind, so people should stop bothering you about it."

[@andrius0592]

Thanks. This should be pinned.

[@LinkiePup]

Absolutely needs to be pinned. This absolutely kills any passion I had for Pirate Software, and I will no longer support Thor. It’s clear he’s boot licking the industry.

[@miles2142]

wild that he deletes the comment and then pretends that it never existed and his 12 year old audience eats it up

[@FluffyOwl-Uhma]

Thor deleting it actually shows how thin skinned he is.

[@dylanherron3963]

@@LinkiePup Look, I can understand this lapse of judgement upon this whole discussion but "Thor is a bootlicker of the industry" is like, a very "I'm 14 years old" take.

[@CliffDiverBOA]

I wouldn't have a problem with Thor disagreeing with the initiative if he wasn't so mean-spirited and stubborn about it. He insults Ross on a personal level and refuses communication or discussion on the topic. I saw the portion of his stream reacting to his own initial video on it and he claims the only people going against him are people sending death threats, ignoring everyone who legitimately argues against his points. It's so egotistical which is a shame coming from a guy who has inspired me to get back on my own game development journey.

[@jdick91]

You have to be really sensitive to think he insulted anyone on a personal level

[@mightquinnable]

Deleted Louis rossmann comment on the video too

[@PandamoniumBruu]

@@mightquinnable it was Ross comment, not Louis (still a dick move)

[@malomarshers]

@@PandamoniumBruu It was both. Louis Rossmann also had a comment deleted on one of his videos.

[@snintendog]

@@PandamoniumBruu It was both Ross and Rossman. Rossman is peeved because he was playing effing devils advocate FOR thor.

[@Sizzyl]

so THIS is why i only know him as the YT shorts guy and have never seen any longer-form content of his, these takes make no sense lol

[@ImJCyo]

@@Sizzyl tbf he mostly streams, and doesn't have many long form video content. It's easy for him to stream and post clips to YT.

[@Astrojox_]

oh my god he has one bad take therefore he must be an awful content creator

[@Sizzyl]

@@Astrojox_ very true! Exactly what I was saying!

[@Astrojox_]

@@Sizzyl u crazy

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

am I lucky I hsve shorts hidden

[@ShuAbLe]

I didn't see people make this example yet, but Minecraft Java officially distributes its server and client, anyone can host a server, make server and client mods, all versions are officially available also. You can download an older version of the client and server with custom mods and have fun with friends if you want to for some reason. Some of Thor's concerns are real, there are a lot of pay to win Minecraft servers, a lot of shady servers, and some potential revenue of official servers/services is lost to unofficial servers/services. Buut, I do agree that distributing all is the right way to go. Gamers should have an option to buy a specific version of server and client, really have the files, not as a service. The developer can always offer a official server as a paid service plus sells etc. When a next version of client and/or server is developed, gamers can buy it again they feel the new version is worth. This way gamers keep buying new versions only if they think is worth it and developers feel the need to make the changes gamers want to keep having revenue. Not super capitalist, but more fare and open. Like Minecraft was on its origins.

[@uis246]

@@ShuAbLe technically Minecraft JE client also contains server. And technically Minecraft is multiplayer-only game. Singleplayer just secretly starts embedded server.

[@uis246]

Even assuming Thor is completely correct, in his argument status quo is worse. In current state 'Bad Guy' makes server software, does all Thor said and gets self-published developer disappear into nothing with everything it had. Then 'Bad Guy' can spin up server he written beforehand and truly capture all players. While if this passes, 'Bad Guy' will have to do something with all those free servers and all those invite-only servers he might not even know they exist.

[@bloody4558]

"Some of Thor's concerns are real, there are a lot of pay to win Minecraft servers, a lot of shady servers, and some potential revenue of official servers/services is lost to unofficial servers/services. Buut, I do agree that distributing all is the right way to go." Not really because these issues already happen regardless of legality. It's not something which the initiative will affect.

[@LinkiePup]

@@uis246it only really does that after 1.3.1 And it does so, so that people can play on LAN. No internet, you can still play your worlds offline.

[@SemiIocon]

I am thankful that this "drama" happened though, I didn't know of the initiative before and have signed it now.

[@illpunchyouintheface9094]

Yea. Thor might be a company shill, but he has gotten the word out for people like you to join in on the fight. And thank you for signing, it means a lot to us fellow gamers who love games and want to save them

[@vojtisekhovor]

Aside his arguments I kinda dislike his condescending tone and basically painting Ross and people who are for this initiative as idiots.

[@BloodAssassin]

He said that they are either idiots or don't understand game development (uninformed enough). If you ask me, it's a good thing we have counter arguments against stop killing games because for something to be refined you have to argue about it and reach the best possible solution to the problem. Even if this initiative passes there's no garranty that EU will do anything about it, only a small percentage. I guess piracy is the only way out if this if they don't do anything. Because "piracy is caused by a bad service". If the devs themselves allowed making private servers this wouldn't be an issue. We can always boycott these companies.

[@Wr41thgu4rd]

@@BloodAssassin Hashing it out with Ross would be the W, instead he chooses to spout rhetoric across the net like a coward.

[@BloodAssassin]

@@Wr41thgu4rd That would be perfect. It's seems like an excuse, his reason that he brought up, why he won't talk with Ross

[@nairocamilo]

​"We can always boycott... " That doesn't work, since "vote with your wallet" is a fallacy. You'd need a very orchestrated boycott movement for it to work, and that wouldn't happen very well because... Well, I don't exactly like the same games another person does. And vice versa. "Why/how would I boycott Capcom if I don't even play Resident Evil?" Now, if only we had actual, tangible regulations and legislation (made after a body of MEPs looked into the issue with specialists, industry experts and counter arguments after _an initiative_ was successfully sent to them)...? Now that would be better chances for the consumer to be heard, wouldn't it?

[@GamePlayuh9510]

@@nairocamilo Vote with your wallet is as much a fallacy as boycotting. Which is to say that it would absolutely work, if everyone actually got on board. The problem is the slop enjoyers, and the big investment firms pushing agendas into everything. However, I think it's safe to say that the beast of "live-service" should never have been fed in the first place. And we wouldn't need legislation to defeat it now, if we'd just not nurtured it to begin with. Part of saying "vote with your wallet" is to change the mindset of the average gamer, moving forward. Because even if the current iteration of live service was to die off, the companies would simply try again, with a fresh coat of paint. And we don't want to use government legislation to fix everything. That's too much reliance on governmental bodies.

[@limoneadeGlass]

- *Calls himself PirateSoftware* - *Boasts that he developed a game where progress is directly tied to achievements* - *Thinks that stops pirates when achievement managers exist* - *Doesn't actually care to PirateSoftware as he doesn't believe in game preservation (Stop Killing Games is, by proxy, game preservation)* Ah, there he is. That mf. What a tool.

[@BenderBendingRodriguezOFFICIAL]

He also thinks spacewar is a piracy metric when the reality is that it pops up when the steam API is being called. Unreal Engine 5 has a steam plugin and it does exactly that and it's meant to test achievements lmao.

[@monitor265]

@@BenderBendingRodriguezOFFICIAL many MANY patches to make online functionality for pirated steam games work by using spacewar, it basically is a piracy metric lol

[@kleddo3126]

If he can pirate himself its fine, if he gets pirated or little money is gone :( Buhu Buhuhu like Mr Krabs would whine.

[@ventilo1825]

funnily enough that achievement thing was the only thing I knew about him before I heard his stopkillinggames take

[@mostlypixels2975]

How are you supposed to start a new game if progress it's tied to your achievements?

[@xan1242]

Paid private servers existed for years and will continue to exist. It's not a novel concept. The owners at least have to break even in order to maintain it. Or, sometimes offer more features than the official servers, such as better anti-cheats, better moderation, better content in general, etc. I only see this as a positive.

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

The Battlefield servers are the best examples of community servers that are better than the official ones and the servers selling VIP slots always had the best quality.

[@Amsel_616]

​@@imnotusingmyrealname4566Also the Old CoD games, try to play whitout fan servers and you might as well put you PC on the street whit a "pick me up" sing because you got super hacked.

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

@@Amsel_616 lol yeah, Activision doesn't give a shit about protecting consumers

[@hellishcyberdemon7112]

​@imnotusingmyrealname4566 not always I've been banned on more than one occasion because admins don't like weapons you are using and want to get 100 kills on a helicopter while banning stingers

[@ImJCyo]

Ragnarok Online private servers, to add onto the point at 11:00 or so, have existed for DECADES. Both kRO and iRO still officially exist and have a fairly massive playerbase, still receiving updates and still being developed. There are thousands of private servers of all types, some monetized, others not. kRO and iRO still exist and are in perfect health despite this. Argument moot. And when kRO and iRO decide to shut down, we'll still have private servers to relive those memories, locations and events across THREE different emulators. Thor's argument is bad and he should feel bad.

[@ImJCyo]

I also wanna take a brief moment here to mention that I have hosted SEVERAL of these servers, monetized and not, and have had player counts in the high hundreds. I can personally attest to Ragnarok Online's official servers not suffering from this.

[@DraconiusDragora]

Point: kRO and iRO actually *did* shut down for a while, before they changed owners. All official servers were shut down before transferring them. Then the new owners booted it back up. They were even addressing this about a year before it would happen to players. And the servers were down for if memory serves for 14 hours before they were up and running again.

[@ImJCyo]

@@DraconiusDragora I'm not really seeing how it detracts from the point though. Change in ownership and the servers down for 14 hours or so doesn't mean the game died, and they also announced it well in advance. Even if they didn't, the private servers existed even then, and were not likely to contribute to any shutdown.

[@Kaldortangerine]

red faction is an excellent example of player run support after the game lost dev support, still got private servers 20yrs later and can still be bought

[@Darktyr3]

lets not forget the community patches that enable the game to function on modern systems. when Volition stopped supporting the game the community stepped up and have upheld support for the game independently from the devs if i'm interpreting Thor's words correctly, what should have happened is that when Volition dropped support everyone should have stopped playing, uninstalled the game and promptly thrown it away and forgotten. in his words, a game with only a few players is not worth supporting and is not worth preserving but that's just my interpretation of his reasoning applied to a practical example, as the video states, he contradicts himself a lot and it makes it difficult to apply his logic to existing scenarios

[@SandorValiumi]

Fun fact, he was a well known second life scammer called maldives figtree with a ferret sona

[@forlexer]

got any search terms I could look up to see this?

[@SandorValiumi]

Maldavious Figtree

[@SandorValiumi]

Or Maldavious figtree second life or reddit

[@forlexer]

@@SandorValiumi thanks

[@awesome_by_default]

"We're not making money on this game anymore so we're shutting it down" "Ok. Let me take it over so I can play with friends." "How dare you take away our revenue!" Huh?! Edit: Took out a portion of a statement I didn't agree with anymore.

[@lllKXlll]

If you didn't include "make a few bucks" I'd agree, however, owning a business doesn't just mean creating something and releasing it into the world for free, business owners are incurring risks by spending money/time into it, I don't think it's fair that others get to profit off that. Using dead games only for fun though, makes it much better, but it's not like the companies are losing absolutely nothing by letting you have your way, the same way people complain that react content steals potential customers attention away from them, the same can be said by letting dead games be revived. IMO, it's still scummy to kill games over that, so I won't side with companies over that.

[@awesome_by_default]

@@lllKXlll You're right. I thought about it and I think that was against what I was saying.

[@kimutone2970]

​@@lllKXlll even so... GTA San Andreas has many online servers, and sn online that only even exists thanks to the community. All those servers usually have big ranks people pay for to help cover server costs and make s profit for thesdmins, and so do pretty much all private servers in every game that allows them. Why is that a bad thing precisely? It sounds like a YOU problem that people would prefer to pay on private servers than pay on the shittier official servers. So yeah, I think they should given a "grace" time where they wouldn't allow monetization, but after games reach end of life, I don't know why you'd think it's bad people wanted to profit off of it.

[@Br1cht]

Thor dropped that mask.

[@Noxis07]

It's not like we're suppressing Thor's right to speak on the matter, quite the contrary really. Ross has offered to have an open discussion with him and get his perspective on the matter multiple times, yet he keeps refusing. He's instead resorting to assassinating Ross' character with baseless claims. If Thor truly believed we were misguided with our campaign, he could've helped steer the ship in the right direction.

[@redcoffeemug7537]

Thor's argument of "online games were only few people are playing, aren't worth preserving" is some of the stupidest shit i ever heard. Like realistically, how many people would you need to recreate the environment of an on online multiplayer game, 5-10 people? you really think someone couldn't simply go to a discord or reddit forum and find 9 other people to relive some nostalgic feelings of a game they used to play? and even more appalling, the idea that something like FFXIV or WoW has zero worth outside of interacting with other people is ridiculous. Are the single player quests not still there? is the world still explorable? Is there no worth in killing smaller enemies and hanging out with NPCs, while listening to the beautiful music? It's crazy that Thor calls himself "pirate software", cause he is saying some ridiculous anti-consumer stuff.

[@mightquinnable]

All of this

[@FeldiArts]

okay then try to play an MMO like... World of warcraft and do innis by yourself because you can't get a group. at that point you might as well play a single player game. "It's crazy that Thor calls himself "pirate software", cause he is saying some ridiculous anti-consumer stuff." I dunno his boycott of Sony, because of their anti consumer practices of forcing you to use an external account that is not available to all countries (I think 130 countries are barred from making a PSN acc) is pretty pro consumer. He is quite pro player but only if it actually makes sense for the devs. Server costs, maintenance and proper bug support is a lot of work and the reason why most private servers ask for donations and sell Premium on their servers. And he was also vocal about very much disliking barring singleplayer games behind an always online requirement. But The stop Killing games Initiative is so badly and vaguely worded, that that might not even come to the minds of the Lawmakers. Polititians aren't the brightest when it comes to Video Games, so giving them the opportunity to ruin everything by giving them a too vaguely worded initiative is a REAL problem.

[@redcoffeemug7537]

@@FeldiArts "at that point you might as well play a single player game" uh....okay. Better then not playing the game at all. Again, are you really saying that there is no worth to WoW outside of multiplayer content? Is doing raids the only thing one can do in WoW? come on now. WoW is also literally the worst example you could have used, the game is decades old and you still can easily find other people to play it with.

[@FeldiArts]

@@redcoffeemug7537 I've been in abandoned MMOs and honestly... it felt like a ghost of a game (Otherland for example). Those games are conceptualized to be played in multiplayer. it's kinda funny how you turn "you could just play single player games at this point" into "You shouldn't play any games" because that tells me that you DO value the multiplayer aspect more than the game itself... a bit contradicting with your "Again, are you really saying that there is no worth to WoW outside of multiplayer content?" you kinda answered that question yourself by not wanting to play single player games instead XD

[@redcoffeemug7537]

@@FeldiArts i got confused by your shit way of phrasing things. i thought you meant with "okay then try to play an MMO like... World of warcraft and do innis by yourself because you can't get a group. at that point you might as well play a single player game" That playing WoW by yourself is LIKE playing a single player game. Not that i should play a DIFFERENT single player game. Which is a stupid sentiment to have. The point i was trying to make is that there is still worth to WoW even played alone, and when multiplayer is removed it doesn't immediately need to thrown into the garbage.

[@mx338]

Thor sees himself firstly in the shoes of the companies, because he is worried about his own potential bottom line. He can do that, but he should be honest about not being on our side.

[@BloodAssassin]

He also has friends working for these companies.

[@paleintrovert6495]

I wouldn't argue it'd hurt his own potential bottom line much because the arguments show that the initiative wouldn't even hurt the bottom line of anyone. And he's not working in the live service game industry. He's just plainly wrong and that's unfortunate.

[@Pedro8675309]

Isn't he a Nepotism-baby since his dad worked in Blizzard before him?

[@henryy.4878]

@Pedro8675309 Yes he is.

[@krokenlochen]

@@BloodAssassinafter all this happened I reached out to a friend of mine who started working at Blizz last year. He seemed receptive to the initiative, albeit he wasn’t sure how the nitty gritty would work. I asked if any of his colleagues had opinions, according to him some are indifferent, some are “that does seem nice.” Given that they actually work on building games and are not glorified player babysitters, I thought Thor’s vocal hate boner was kind of odd.

[@Nickname863]

What i never liked about the argumentation of Thor is that he constantly attempts to reframe the goals of the initiative, while refusing to discuss is with people that are from the initiative. Only "comproising" by considering to talk to people of which he knows their stance doesnt deviate from his own to much. I am not just claiming that, it is what it looks like. He keeps saying stuff like "wee need to have a discussion about..." and then talks about a changed variant of the goals of the initiative. Or makes up intentions of the initiative that arent stated. Then he refuses to talk to his opposition, so he doesnt want a discussion, he wants to set a Topic.

[@imclueless9875]

100% agreed he is. I cant say what company i currently work at but i am 35+ and have worked in the industry since i was 14 and got my beginning as a QA tester,things were so different back then. Went to school through a company initiative and got my degree. NO dev that i have met agrees with what he said at all. Even my coworkers all think he is being bought off and pushing corporate agendas. It stands to reason so too since he has been given access to alot of IP software that he has no business having access too. 100% he is a shill that is coming from someone who is in the industry.

[@kimutone2970]

BULLSEYE. Thor has been made director of strategy on a publisher that is about to release an online only live service game. How convenient he forgot to mention possible conflicts of interests in both his videos, and is plain refusing to discuss with Ross. He is NOT arguing in good faith.

[@SnackrificeDub]

Dodge that damn shield swipe bruh

[@Lackingx]

Yeah... I'm bad.

[@fletcher371]

One needs to remember that Jason has a vested interest in such laws and regulations not existing. He is co-owner of a puplishing company that is publishing a new live service game in addition to his own game requiring steam connection in order to read saves (your steam achievements function as your save file according to him).

[@DuxAKADuke]

The moment I heard him say "antiviruses like malwarebytes don't do anything, they're useless, you only need windows defender" is when I knew not to trust a damn thing that came out of that silly Billy's mouth

[@illpunchyouintheface9094]

Yep. Malwarebytes is basically internet Jesus

[@petervarelas198]

I mean yeah. Malwarebytes is mostly a Scaner not an Antivirus, if you have Malwarebytes than your Windows defender is doing almost all the heavy lifiting.

[@lungcanc3r666]

...

[@StinkyBuster]

This Thor guy 100% sniffs his own farts

[@steviewolfeofficial]

His takes make sense when you find out he created a game publishing company called Offbrand Games with Ludwig Ahgren (Moist eSports Co-founder) and its first release is an always online live service game. He's arguing in terrible faith in solely personal interest. I had to research this on my own as he brought this up at zero point in either of his two videos on this subject. You'd think it'd be important to mention as the BIGGEST voice against stop killing games that you're actively working with a company creating a product under the business model Stop Killing Games seeks to eradicate. But no. Moreso he flat out deleted the recent stream this was mentioned in, and has been outright blocking anyone who even mentions this in his chat. So this isn't about one bad take. It's about Thor making an attempt at character assassination as a tactic to eliminate a potential business obstacle. Which in his own words is "gross".

[@petervarelas198]

Well yes if you saw the original video the reason why he makes it is becausec, the devs working in the industry can not give their opinion with out the getting fired for creating a scandal for their company. But it does make sense why he would speak out against something that will will hurt mostly indie devs and small publishers not so much the giants. Also about Ludwig is Moist eSports Co-Founder is wrong. It should be Co-Owner since Moistcritical founded the company and Ludwig latter on came on the team.

[@kimutone2970]

​@@petervarelas198 if their entire businesses model is to milk the customer with intentionally predatory game design, maybe they deserve to get hurt. This will not hurt 99% of indie devs though, since indie devs don't fucking engage in games as a service practices. Thor is a corpo tool, don't let his bad faith arguments get to you.

[@69viper]

1:10 the irony. considering, that on secondlife he was selling skins that he got from one of his "employees" then ends up firing them but then continues to sell and profit off those skins.

[@LLtrash]

All his argument make me mad because if you've dealt with intellectually dishonest people you'll know this guy is just trying to drown out the real issues and push his bad faith arguments. He only even responds to the easy to spin comments in his videos and refuses to acknowledge every time Ross has approached him to debate the issues constructively. That guy is a tool

[@illpunchyouintheface9094]

Yep

[@mr2miach]

Thor's logic fails about the monetization aspect right off the bat. Asheron's Call was created by Turbine and backed by Microsoft. Somewhere along the line Warner Brothers bought out Turbine after Turbine parted ways with MS. The whole point for WB to buy Turbine was Turbine made Lord of the Rings Online. WB has the movie IP and wanted the game IP. Makes sense. WB set Asheron's Call to a "Maintenance mode" making it free to play as long as you purchased the game because after something like 14 years the player base had shrunk by a lot. Fast forward to Jan. 31st 2017 and WB shutdown all the AC servers. Sighting it too costly to keep them up and running. Fair enough. Games dead right? Well, now there are server emulators, people still playing, and the community is steady with small growth spurts. Servers aren't monetized. Point is, if your live service game is dying/dead, you aren't making any money off it anyway to justify keeping the game running. Which means, even if there are private servers, how much could they possibly monetize an already dead game that wasn't worth the cost of running anyway? Thor's claims of monetization are laughable if you're already killing the game because there's no more money to be made. As for his, bad guys are going to purposely attack the game/studio until it dies to make private servers for monetization reasons is BS. How many WoW private servers are there currently, how many of them charge money, and was Blizzard bot and exploit attacked for those servers to exist? Amazingly, Blizzard listened to players and spun up old classic servers that people were wanting. Thor's arguments do not align with what actually happens in the real world.

[@Flyon86]

The reason Thor won't debate anyone on the issue on stream is because he knows his arguments won't carry water against anyone that has a basic understanding of the issue.

[@luckykennedy7364]

Especially against someone who put years into researching it like Ross.

[@Lackingx]

Well, I think thor is being intentionally obtuse on this issue. Whether it's for his own interests as a developer, or to have a "hot take".

[@shockwavecity]

"debates" have devolved into "a series of pre-scripted gotchyas". I don't want to see them, and neither does anyone else. It's garbage content.

[@Flyon86]

@@shockwavecity They don't have to have a live debate, but Thor actually reading the FAQ to address to the main points would've been a good start.

[@habibikebabtheiii2037]

​@@Lackingxthis would affect his stupid heart game and he would have to reprogram his anti piracy codes.

[@Dracas42]

Y'know, one game I think of when people talk private servers is actually the first Final Fantasy MMO, FF11. That game is currently a much different game than it was all those years ago, and private servers allow people to relive their nostalgia days.

[@endme6168]

If you change out every instance where Thor says "developer" to "publisher", it'll make a lot more sense. Because ACTUAL developers already don't decide any of this stuff. Most of the decisions come from up top, and developers just work a 9 to 5 where they code things on their little "To Do" lists, given to them by management. What's it matter if they code it in a way where people will be able to keep playing instead of the very strict specifications of anti-consumer mechanics (DRM, online only, etc). The former is easier too...

[@illpunchyouintheface9094]

Exactly

[@Basheequa]

Great video. Yeah I'm kinda baffled by his take too, but the silver lining about him talking about is that now many more people know about the initiative. P.S. Hope that boss didn't give you much more trouble.

[@Lackingx]

I will beat him eventually

[@A_Wild_Dyzzy]

9:10 Honestly I’d be pretty interested in a game mode of Apex where it’s just a 1v1 on a massive map, slowly shrinking. Where you have to gather what you can to prepare for the showdown at the end. That would be pretty cool.

[@thatdudnum67potatoe45]

But also overwhelming boring 30 min of prep for 1 minute of fight

[@A_Wild_Dyzzy]

@@thatdudnum67potatoe45 doesn’t have to be empty. Could be npc enemies on the map that you fight to gain better resources. Like Tarkov or Dark and Darker.

[@vipersniperpiper6093]

I mean ,considering how he designed his indie game Heartbound, he is unintentionally doing the exact thing this initiative is trying to stop.

[@saycrain]

what is it that he's doing with that game that's live service related?

[@vipersniperpiper6093]

@@saycrain So the way he programmed the game is that he made the game's progression be extremely tied to Steam's achievement system. It is to the point where if Valve did the smallest changes to it, it would fuck the game by heavy proportions, he fixed it once during development but what happens after like half a decade or so once the game is finished being made? The game could be made unplayable once the changes happens. He did it for piracy reasons, which is dumb and pointless ultimately.

[@technodoomed1]

@@vipersniperpiper6093 And his channel is called "Pirate Software". Purest irony. xD

[@hrotger]

@@vipersniperpiper6093 and this extremely idiotic save game system doesn't even prevent piracy at all because there are steam achievement emulators and you can pirate it no problem. Also his game isn't even finished after what like, 8 years?

[@saycrain]

@@vipersniperpiper6093 if you follow the definition of live service game, then that's not it. A live service game is as stated: In the video game industry, games as a service represents providing video games or game content on a continuing revenue model, similar to software as a service. Games as a service are ways to monetize video games either after their initial sale, or to support a free-to-play model.

[@shApYT]

Its not bootlicking for developers. This does not affect developers. It only affects publishers and IP holders who benefit from controlling access to what you can buy and how you can interact with what you bought.

[@symmetrie_bruch]

thaaaaaaaank you, this sh+t was/is driving me nuts all the time, bobby kottick is not a developer. i constantly heard people lumping those together. no developer ever wants to make a life service game, in 99,99% of cases they´re forced to by publishers, no developer wanted gambling mechanincs and shitty loot boxes in their games, shitty life services, microtransactions or deliberately making your game much much lkess fun, so that you can back to default fun with hefty inscrutable purchases. a developer usually wants to make the the best most fun game possible. while the publisher wants to make the most money possible, these are not the same

[@lllKXlll]

Plenty of indie developers are also IP holders, this is not an entirely "rich" people's problem even thought the majority of live services come from big companies. There are plenty of flaws with Thor's arguments, but saying developers are going to be entirely unaffected is also disingenuous.

[@lllKXlll]

@@symmetrie_bruch "Live service" is a bad term for what you're probably implying, because I can say for sure, plenty of non-greedy people would want to make a live service game, but not Suicide Squad like games, I'm talking about MMOs and MOBAs, given enough resources, there'd be thousands more of those.

[@shApYT]

@@lllKXlll the dev here is also taking the role of the publisher when you... Self publish. You have a responsibility to have a sunset plan when you enter a contract with your customer who paid you money. Just like how people would be mad if an individual Dev publishes a paid early access project with the promise of a full release then abandons it without a word.

[@Wr41thgu4rd]

After his deal with Ludwig this guy is going die on the hill of live service.

[@squidward1975]

Thor pretending that we haven't had private server files since 1993 with DOOM. Hell with some fan patches I can still load up an online game of Battlefield 1942 which is 22 years old at this point. Private servers for mmo's have existed for decades at this point and run just fine, and that required reverse engineering, providing server files at death would only make that easier so Thor talking like it's some barrier is completely stupid. On the point of private servers I think that's something we'd have to compromise on with the initiative, I suspect companies will respond that they should have exclusive rights to the playerbase while they're supporting the game. I personally think that'd be a loss but it's a fair compromise I suppose.They definitely demonstrate the desire for older builds of games and they should take that into account while they're supporting the game. Kudos to Daybreak for giving Project 99 their official blessing.

[@illpunchyouintheface9094]

Even consoles like the PS2 have private servers. You can play an online multiplier game on the PS2 right now, so even an excuse for consoles is irrelevant.

[@Ewiril]

I love how he destroys his owmn arguments xD

[@kimutone2970]

Thor left blizzard but blizzard never left him.

[@YouTubeTryingToBeTwiter31581]

„Hi, my name is Jason Thorpo also known as Proprietary Software.”

[@Batterydennis]

At 1:39 it became blatantly obvious that this isn’t a real discussion and that this person doesn’t know what they are talking about. Remember kids, just because someone can make a video doesn’t mean they are worth listening to.

[@ianmccollum2643]

I thought I was losing my mind reading these comments. His arguments don’t make sense off rip and is just based on “but you should be able to do it so make it happen.”

[@Sk3pic]

yeah clearly lol he just wants clout :((

[@illpunchyouintheface9094]

Doesn’t make him wrong. Companies choice to make games live service to control players, it’s not a need, it’s a choice by companies. Countless games have allowed local hosting in the past, some as far back as the 90s.

[@LYSYRGIX]

​@ianmccollum2643 ​@ianmccollum2643 no, the argument is "if you knew you couldn't have done it, you shouldn't have made the game; but because you have now you either (give us our money back in todays value/create a playable single player experience and or Restore online capabilities. ) As stated, you can run your own server.....not to mention if they bring micro transactions it would pay for the servers plus make them money. Bottom line is there ARE ways of fixing this, but if they don't then 100% they should he forced to give a full value refund woth inflation accounted for. It's like selling you a gun that on the 1000th shot falls apart intentionally

[@Sayzee_YFRWN]

I like when him draw funny little shapes, him make caveman understand

[@legion999]

"What if it's online only live service" Thats your freakin problem, nobody forced you to design it like that. I love seeing this guy getting pushback on his nonsense.

[@vantadaga]

It will render an entire genre of games obsolete, and force millions of people away from games, you guys cannot call yourself "gamers"

[@ambralemon]

​@@vantadagadoes any of your uninformed comments not end with an attack on the other person? Live service is not a genre, what are you on about.

[@vantadaga]

@@ambralemon MMOs, you bell end

[@asain3586]

​@@vantadaga since when live service is a genre, it's a greedy practice that companies cook up to maximize profit. The only games that can use this are Free to Play games, not 70 dollars game like CoD

[@crazyinsane500]

@@vantadaga People have hosted private servers for MMOs for decades. In fact, you not having the memory of when Blizzard decided to go hard on going after people for hosting legacy versions of WoW, which was only a few years ago, shows you're not old enough to be talking about these subjects.

[@JoseEncarnacao]

Mannnnnnn, you are a legend. At around minute 10 I thought to myself listening to Thor's bullshit argument: it would be amazing if the editor inserted Thor's previous remark about No one has the right to enforce what games you play. And you did it... Thank you, Thank you, Thank you! ❤

[@illpunchyouintheface9094]

Really came in clutch with that one

[@EPICSHEEK]

Minecraft is the greatest countrrargument regarding servers and any MMO regarding botting

[@Dawwwg]

As a game developer myself for over 30 years, I really only hear excuses. And then he claims "other developers reached out privately in support of his view". Completely false narrative, I haven't spoken to one dev that isn't in favour of SKG; publishers are a different beast of course ....

[@blindmown]

As a pretty new game developer. This whole situation is informing my position on how to behave in the future. For me, gaining and keeping the respect of gamers is my number one goal. I WILL find a business model that is reasonably profitable and also prioritizes the player. I won't have subscriptions, I won't overcharge, I won't implement micro transactions or battlepasses, I will make sure players can play and own any games they buy from me in perpetuity. Hopefully players will see my commitment to them and support me in building fun things for them. If they don't do that, it's a shame but I won't combat that by becoming toxic to the very people who I want to make things for.

[@kimutone2970]

​@@blindmown it's not even about that, live service games aren't bad per se, all we gamers want is an end of life plan, nothing more. Monetize it in any way you see fit while it's running of course.

[@Wolvahulk]

Honestly, the thing is that the law likely won't even apply retroactively so none of the older games will be impacted anyway. What everyone wants is for companies to have a plan on making the game available even after end of service. That's it. Thor is also just plain wrong about some things. He brings up League of Legends as a game that can't function outside of Riot's servers. Except to our knowledge, eSports tournaments are held on an offline version of the game that runs on the previous patch to the current one...

[@floydthibodeaux1844]

He’s not doing it for developers. He’s doing it for publishers.

[@PowerfulRift]

Ross is correct no doubts.

[@dracsgamedevdungeon3053]

I'm just going to say one thing. Pirate Software's biggest complaint isn't so much the idea of releasing server software at end of life. It's the idea of being forced to retroactively apply this to already released games, many of which can't be released this way or can't without immense extra expense. As an indie dev myself this is a completely reasonable fear that any dev can and should have. If I have to suddenly go back and relicense a 10 year old game with a new perpetual license, repackage them into a server binary, and set up a brand new host to distribute it, all when that games don't even have any players and at their peak would have had maybe 10-50 CCU as it is that would easily bankrupt me. That's not really fair to pass a law that retroactively forces me to do this with my entire existing outstanding games library. Additionally, I'm aware of the argument that many people in support of it say it shouldn't apply retroactively. However, that's not what the initiative itself says and I think it's completely fair to criticize that, changing this to be explicit within the initiative itself.

[@urmomgay0166]

thats why its an initiative lmao do you know what that word means?

[@kimutone2970]

None of the laws that change things these dramatically in ANY industry that exists is retroactive. Thor made that argument in bad faith to fearmonger inexperienced devs. NOBODY is asking that this is made retroactively, not Ross and not anyone else. Thor is a corpo tool and in none of his vids does he disclose that he is the director of strategy on a publisher that is about to release an online only live service game. How convenient. Besides, the only thing why this is even a problem to begin with is because it was brought into existence by greedy publishers and lazy devs. End of life plans were not a thing before, because GAMES WEREN'T BEING HELD ON LIFE SUPPORT BY A COMPANY. Fix your dhit devs, don't expect the consumer to pay for shitty design decisions.

[@Jorendo]

The arguement that people would kill a game on purpose just to host their own private servers for money is insane. Especially seeing more and more "singleplayer" games are online connection required. They won't patch it near the end of their service so you won't need the connection. How does that even hold up in the argument? That won't require a private server, just us being able to play our freaking games. Like look at Fable 3, Games for Windows live got shut down, bam, game can no longer be bought on PC, yet downloading a copy is deemed illegal even though they don't provide you a alternative. There are more games like that that you can't play anymore cause security servers got shut down. Another thing he misses, i guess due to his age (I don't know how old he is), but on the PC we used to be able to run our own servers for games like CoD, Battlefield, etc. These days the greedy developers/publishers made that impossible. So when they shut down the servers you can't play that CoD or Battlefield game anymore, meanwhile I can still play on a Battlefield Vietnam server or even the OG battlefield, and yes there are still active servers with people actively playing those old 20 year old games while the old CoD games are dead as the developers were incompetent idiots who left a massive security breach and now everyone is prone to getting hacked if they play the old CoD games online and god forbid they release a patch for the old games to fix that, can't have that after making billions on those games.

[@jeremylindemann5117]

I've never once heard of an outside party wanting the server binary so they can monetise the game. It's almost always because people want to run a server for the sake of the game and the community and they don't care about monetisation. Thor brought a deck of cards to a library and tries to confuse us away from the real issue.

[@Wolvahulk]

I'll add another comment and say that personally what I truly care about is for us as customers to essentially have the "right to repair" when it comes to games as well. There's been plenty if situations where fans of a game, that have bought it in the past, modified it post end if service so that it functions. All completely free of charge, no monetization, only to be shut down for various reasons. Those reasons usually being geed tbh...

[@Hmuda]

That "destroy the company and monetise it ourselves" argument is so monumentally and colossaly stupid, it's frankly breathtaking. Company releases server binaries publicly. One group uses it to create a server with monetisation turned on. Another group does the same, but without monetisation. Where will people play in that case?

[@courier7049]

This "developer" spends more time in paint than actually complete his game

[@ArthursHD]

:D he doesn't stream when he works at the game all the time

[@Voyajer.]

7+ years in development, peak player count of 121 5 years ago, current player count of 11

[@ethanspittle6851]

If only Thor had experience in this giving advice.

[@bllopawah]

me smort me voice deep

[@vicetea86]

I had just thought he was a little preachy, but still very smart/wise. I stand corrected lol

[@matthias6933]

the funniest thing are his nonsensical drawings. He's drawing just a bunch of random boxes and arrows to appear like he's explaining some smart concept

[@illpunchyouintheface9094]

I thought he was drawing a city with roads and buildings at first

[@bobjohnson3875]

KZbin content creator avoid downfall challenge (impossible)

[@almc8445]

Almost all of Thor's argument's re: Intellectual Property come down to "We don't do it like that so that wouldn't work" - Oh the people licensing car models only offer a subscription license... Well duh, but if devs are forced to get permanent licenses for their games, do you think the modelers are just going to give up and not sell licenses?... No they'll just start selling permanent ones...

[@Belladonna-x2c]

Thor has a massive ego, to the point where it's a problem. He has some skill, but has become unshakably convinced that he's the very best, like no one ever was. What's more, he makes the classic mistake of believing since he's the best at one thing (when actually he isn't even that), that he's the best at all kinds of things, as though his skills generalize to all situations. It's sad how much more bearable he would be with just a little bit of humility. But instead, he needs to feel *better than you* - and he doesn't seem to care how his actions affect others. As others have said, it's funny in a depressing way that he calls himself Pirate Software while doing all this. It's as though he's convinced his aesthetics matter more than the substance of what he does.

[@illpunchyouintheface9094]

We don’t rotate around the sun, the sun rotate around Thors ego

[@ALloydRH]

Pirate Software about to join Noodle on my list of cool creators that are actually industry bootlickers.

[@LinkiePup]

Noodle?

[@ALloydRH]

@LinkiePup He makes videos on various gaming related topics. He made a really disingenuous video in the wake of Baldurs Gate 3 doing well, and everyone clowned on AAA devs for not raising their standards. The video is basically a strawman where he goes, "But what about indie devs tho :'(" even though they had nothing to do with the discussion. If you type 'Noodle lied' into KZbin, you'll find a video that explains it.

[@ViddyOJames]

Bootlicker nothing. he IS the industry.

[@pongtre568]

9:47 The best part. Debunked the hypocrisy and I love that.

[@lesbianmorgoth652]

average blizzard nepo baby tbh

[@TheHiddenMarty]

The "botted to oblivion" argument is so regarded... Like you said - you can do this already and SOMEHOW this does not happen.

[@allenja0]

I'm just commenting to get the yt robots to hopefully put this in more people's feeds.

[@blacktemplarbrotherlucius1935]

Over ten years ago people where hosting private servers alongside official servers with no issue, WoW, Star wars Battlefront2, Counter Strike, Gmod, Minecraft, RTS games like Starcraft and Rise of nations, TF2 and the list goes on. The tech hasn't vanished its greedy a$$holes that are making sure we can't.

[@sluminous203]

This guy really pulled a Tarantino and dropped a great successful video then dipped

[@sluminous203]

4:46 the only game i can think of is TF2, and the community literally made non-monetized private servers before this was even happening

[@illpunchyouintheface9094]

Yea the TF2 community have really been pulling their weight in times of great need for so long. Truly stood the test of time and punishment.

[@CharityDiary]

Same guy streamed his playthrough of Animal Well and bragged about solving the hardest puzzles offstream by himself, when he wouldn't have even known they existed without looking them up in the first place. All image, no integrity.

[@gabegaray389]

Thro would probably make an argument that emulators are bad because “art theft” and then then have super Mario 64 pc hes also a furry

[@Wishmaster145]

as a normie and not a developer i dont understand half of the things in question even if i were to dive deeper, but you enlightened me, my only concern would have been security wise either in the download itself or the online experience but we know windows exist anyway..., so im all for the initiative i guess.

[@illpunchyouintheface9094]

Countless games in the past have used local server hosting, and they all have been fine, most of the time they have been better and safer than dedicated servers that are ran by the companies. So don’t worry too much about it

[@georgescdoodle]

Never liked this guy when his shorts blew up. Still don't like him. Didn't think I could like him less; guess I can. Glad to see people wisen up to his BS.

[@illpunchyouintheface9094]

Yep

[@mastersword506]

We are talking about a live service game here, by the way. "The same logic still applies. If the person who killed off the company is not a company anymore, the company in question won't come after you, so it wouldn't matter." It does matter because the company can still find and sue the hacker responsible. If this ideal law for your sake is passed. Then, the person illegally making money off the product can host their own servers and make a profit. That's wrong. So, I would like to see why your method is better at the expense of the creators. Would you instead host a budget server and have hackers who don't care about the consumer and use bigger means of parasitic monetization to fund this poorly maintained game? Do you think that's okay? What will you do with the other hackers entering your private servers? Remember that PirateSoftware is a hacker himself. He knows how to do the things he is talking about. So, this entire idea is flawed. Now, the whole "contradiction" He is saying across the board that no one, including him or you or me, should be told what to do regarding creative passions. So, the copyright law is, by nature, working with that logic. After some time, the copyright law goes away, and then you can do whatever the fuck you want with the source code, For example, Tetris. You can build that game up yourself, and you won't get copyrighted by the company. League of Legends, older patches, yeah, OK, buddy. I'm sorry that the game's state isn't to your liking. Play something else. We can't control what you want. We can control when you can have it. Since taking advantage of someone else's work for your own gain is not OK. People are willing and able to destroy a company with bots, and the hacker who gets rewarded with monetization and private servers is not OK with me. We also can't really debunk a hypothetical. Also, The dead game argument point you brought up doesn't matter in the hierarchy of the issues presented because private servers are monetized by individuals(which is illegal in the current state of our legal world). After all, they don't own the game source code, even if gaining money is happening in secret. "Blizzard is still actively working towards taking down private servers when they can, although in many cases it's difficult as they're hosted in countries where U.S. companies don't have much legal pull and thus can't get the desired result." So, your argument falls short regarding plagiarism in the U.S.A. as it should. Go reverse engineer the games you so desperately want instead of trying to steal someone else's work after the Copyright law timeframe has been concluded. I'm not a legal counselor or have any background in legal affairs. Take my advice cautiously.

[@AnAppealToRakka]

who is this guy? why does his voice piss me off so much?

[@Lackingx]

I'm your father

[@AnAppealToRakka]

@@Lackingx not u the dude in the video ur talking about

[@illpunchyouintheface9094]

@@AnAppealToRakkahe’s a ex blizzard employee which might explain it

[@Lackingx]

@@AnAppealToRakka I'm still your father but I love you son

[@Squid666]

Very to the point, thank you!

[@Kolya-687]

I love how he's contradicting himself with "arguments" that actually are counterarguments to what he's arguing for. Also, it's funny how he thinks it's worst to play a game with low player count, than not playing the game at all. Seriously dude?

[@cheburashka9804]

look at all the old halo games and like the custom maps and game modes that are player created. the people who play these games love these games and will do great things with them its not gonna be bot hell and even if it is who gives a shit if the games dead cause of bots then let it die then not because the company was like “this isnt making money anymore”

[@rosskaske6357]

This guy is completely astro turfed. Never heard of him until I saw his take about the petition, now he's everywhere.

[@dukeofdisastr9015]

THERE IS A COPYRIGHT REGISTRY WHAT???!!!

[@Swagbastian]

MEGA BASED. subbed

[@johnjonson6377]

the worst thing that thor did to himself is that he isn't honest with what his issue really is: Devs will have harder time and there will be less opportunity for the smaller devs. All of his arguments are all for the developers and totally against consumers. He did bring a good point that we should be told that we rent/get a license and not a product but this argument is as good as putting a napkin over a bullet hole. At the end of the day costumer is always right because they are what keeps you afloat, tells others about your game and gives you a reason to provide a better experience. If he doesn't care about the rights of ownership for the consumer than it's more than fair for us to not care how badly he is affected if "stop killing games" becomes law.

[@ScottE-2]

Looking back on it... I think Thor is stuck in this corporate mode where he has to talk on behalf of other developers in the industry seeing as he himself is a developer. Thinking about it some more... I feel like Overwatch 1 should've been brought up as an example of a game that is no longer playable. Not even the version that was originally sold on shelves. It's funny, a game like Minecraft already does this by letting you play beta builds and even something as old as Alpha. Also WoW which is brought up in video. People want less bloat and more fun rather than these haphazard choices by developers for "balancing" rather than fun. I think Thor could've just simply disagreed instead of outright rejecting and separating himself from the movement. Ross Scott is a legend and a real G for not only expanding on his project but answering some important questions with clarifications for those who want to know more. I think Thor's content outside of this kerfuffle of a stance I still widely enjoy but it does sour my view on him. If he was short about it and just said what he truly thought instead of this... bizarre alienation of people, I still probably wouldn't side with him. Especially given just how courteous Ross Scott was when inviting him to have a discussion about it, even if he himself isn't a developer I whole heartedly agree with the movement to Stop Killing Games. Even if there's only 3 people to play it, I don't see a reason why it should end because it wasn't active enough, the developers cannot afford to do so, or it is a complicated legal matter which the latter I can understand a bit more than the former. Licenses make keeping some games alive complicated since they have an expiration date rather than the ability to interact with the game itself which are partly eternal. Needless to say I appreciate the video calling him out on it. Both parts of his "response" have fallen hard in terms of dislikes which is understandable. If I hadn't seen more from what Ross expressed in Thor's comment section (as thanks to the few who tried to preserve his simple comment) I'd probably be none the wiser. Thank you sincerely, I hope your day is well.

[@guderheinz]

Expert dissection of that fraudulent toad's nonsense. My hat is off to you, dear sir!

[@bonnymich]

1) PIRATE everything 2) STOP playing online games 3) STOP buying from online game platforms like steam ps4 store* 4) UNITE a central community hub to co-ordinate 5) BUY DRM FREE from dev site only and backup

[@AKBlackfoot]

You know, I don't want to accuse him[PirateSoftware] of doing what he's saying people could be doing to games, but it kinda sounds like he's done just that before.

[@diegeticfridge9167]

Thank god someone says it.

[@sergeysmirnov1062]

The one thing I will give him - though not as an actual argument against the initiative is that there will always be people who want to get conned out of their money, or even if there weren't... children exist. Case and point: Minecraft. The amount of predatory monetization on some of those is staggering - on a game with tens of thousands of free/non-predatory monetized servers and a good SP experience no less

[@holymegadave]

Im being brainwashed into play Dark Souls by the algorithm always recommending me to play games like it. By the way.. just check Thors game eula... thats says everything you need to know about him.He looks like the kind of guy that loves to suck corporate weee weee... you know? that kind of people that are traitors to their own coworkers to being able to climb up the corporate ladder.

[@w1k0us]

Like he is only person in the world who thinks that EULA is law and everybody should be educated like layer to know exactly every word before "signing" EULA. And after you click on agree button then corporation has right to do anything you agreed, probably even your organs removed.

[@holymegadave]

@@w1k0us like the human centipede from south park episode hahahaa.. they write those fancy "eulas" to make more difficult to the customer to see the real intentions. No body reads that shit cos its full legal bloat. If you want to warn me about something make it clear and readable for regular peasants like me hahaha

[@CripplingMemeAddict]

Booooom beans spilled!!! Well said

[@KOS_Nova]

hey, what's that music at the end of the video called?

[@BenderBendingRodriguezOFFICIAL]

also retail wow has a bot problem too so his argument about being botted out of existence is just asinine.

[@acetrainerarcane1755]

2:11 His point here was that when you include a way for people to monetize your game, there will now be an incentive to get the developer out of the way. Yes people can do this, but currently their incentive isn't anything they can actually gain anything from

[@The1Wolfcast]

Wait until you see that god awful theo rants video

[@tellmewhenitsover]

Imagine private server LOL with thresh as the last champion. Dominion and TT back. The pve game modes as permanent fixtures in customs.

[@Lackingx]

God yes. That would be amazing.

[@timurrte5694]

As an example of private servers I can remember Lineage 2. Private servers are so much more popular (literally 100x of tims) because current main game is so trash: you NEED to spend thousands of $ just to play the game (or grind for years for "good" equip). L2 Private servers still have huge monetisation problems, but not as much as official game. And yeah, Thor's yapping about some bullshit 🤝

[@CripplingMemeAddict]

Spilled the beans!!! Well said!

[@invadervim9037]

Idk man it seems a little far fetched that someone with deep familial ties to a dying industry would shill for them.