Preferences

The requirement is not to be standalone end-user distributable, the requirement is that it be somehow possible for an end user to set it up, which is a lot easier, unless the developers don't even know how to set up the backend. But that's a low bar still.

I've built a couple multiplayer browser games and getting the server component to a state where it's end-user distributable probably involves another 50% of the work that I put into building it in the first place since I'm just rsyncing code onto a VPS.

It's like thinking that just because the code exists, then it's in a state that could be pushed publicly to github, and that's not the case for almost any codebase.

To think that I would need to do all that the second I charge $1 seems unreasonable. And I think you underestimate how true this is for most games you see on Steam.

This is a proposal for new games, not existing games. If the requirement for this is there in the design stage then it incentivizes developers to design it in from the start and pushes the implementation costs down signficantly.

If a developer decides to not take that requirement in the design stage then that is their prerogative, but not even doing it would be like not following any other EU consumer protection law.

> since I'm just rsyncing code onto a VPS.

I mean, this covers it. Put that code out, and some one else can rysnc it to a VPS. The ask here in not that it's nicely bundled up into a single click deploy. It's that a path exists at all. If I need a fleet of servers and some technical know how, that's fine. Even expected for many games.

This item has no comments currently.

Keyboard Shortcuts

Story Lists

j
Next story
k
Previous story
Shift+j
Last story
Shift+k
First story
o Enter
Go to story URL
c
Go to comments
u
Go to author

Navigation

Shift+t
Go to top stories
Shift+n
Go to new stories
Shift+b
Go to best stories
Shift+a
Go to Ask HN
Shift+s
Go to Show HN

Miscellaneous

?
Show this modal