That effort will have to be included in the development of a game. But can you explain what effort there would be? If you have a server .exe (or whatever) and have to release it. What has to be done? I’m assuming you’re talking about a guide how to run it? Shouldn’t that be part of the internal process already? New employees will also have to know how to run the server, right?
Server side software is rarely ”just an exe”. It involves databases, cron jobs, message queuing, and other internal tooling or cloud infrastructure. All of these must be in place properly for the software to function.
How is it tested locally? There must be a way, right? Developers can’t just be releasing stuff willy nilly to the main system in order to test it, can they?
They probably don’t test the entire server architecture locally. Maybe only a fragment of it, with the rest of the environment either mocked, or against a shared dev environment hosted in the cloud.
As a non-dev, I can’t say if that’s standard, but it doesn’t sound like good practice. Regardless, just like the woman said, GDPR was thought to have mAssIVe cOsTs upon development and business, but in the end companies dealt with it. Companies with insufficient preparation or unwilling to plan to leave the game in a playable state, will have to factor in the costs of not complying.
This issue is about consumer rights and if you’re for “what you buy is what you own”, then being against rendering games unplayable after purchase should be logical.
That effort will have to be included in the development of a game. But can you explain what effort there would be? If you have a server .exe (or whatever) and have to release it. What has to be done? I’m assuming you’re talking about a guide how to run it? Shouldn’t that be part of the internal process already? New employees will also have to know how to run the server, right?
Server side software is rarely ”just an exe”. It involves databases, cron jobs, message queuing, and other internal tooling or cloud infrastructure. All of these must be in place properly for the software to function.
How is it tested locally? There must be a way, right? Developers can’t just be releasing stuff willy nilly to the main system in order to test it, can they?
They probably don’t test the entire server architecture locally. Maybe only a fragment of it, with the rest of the environment either mocked, or against a shared dev environment hosted in the cloud.
As a non-dev, I can’t say if that’s standard, but it doesn’t sound like good practice. Regardless, just like the woman said, GDPR was thought to have mAssIVe cOsTs upon development and business, but in the end companies dealt with it. Companies with insufficient preparation or unwilling to plan to leave the game in a playable state, will have to factor in the costs of not complying.
This issue is about consumer rights and if you’re for “what you buy is what you own”, then being against rendering games unplayable after purchase should be logical.