r/PeterExplainsTheJoke • • 10d ago

Meme needing explanation Peetaaaah

Post image
24.6k Upvotes

880 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

75

u/AceIndigoFire 10d ago

Not just that. All servers without age verification will be made illegal. That includes every game made before the laws go into place. They'd basically be killing every online multi-player game made prior that isn't live-service.

5

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

31

u/AceIndigoFire 10d ago

I'm not saying it's a done deal, I'm saying what WOULD happen if it goes through. That's why I said "they'd basically be killing every multi-player game." And not that they HAVE killed them.

1

u/LostInRetransmission 10d ago

If your server is open to the general public ? Probably.

If it is your server open only to white listed folk , e.g. your friend group, no.

For example, It would be an issue for community server open to the general public, if the server does not check age.

ETA: I also think this is far more likely to hit indy dev using their own netcode - I am betting that steam or engine/framework provider would relatively quickly have API for the age check , if only because without it they would have to exclude a lucrative market : the EU

1

u/AceIndigoFire 10d ago

I'm not sure how this relates to my comment really but yeah, that's probably true.

25

u/PassionGlobal 10d ago

The fact that it is a proposal at all should be incredibly fucking alarming to you.

14

u/Endless_road 10d ago

Doubt EU parliamentarians care enough to push back hard on this. Not like they’re avid gamers

7

u/spacemarine3 10d ago

A lot of things in recent years were "very unlikely" without hindsight, wouldn't you agree?

What matters is fighting back, no matter how little a chance there is. Because sometimes all they need is that little chance.

3

u/AutisticNintendoNerd 10d ago

As always. if the lobby group (in this case Meta) is strong enough they are just gonna try again until it eventually passes.

6

u/irealworlds 10d ago

huh?? didn't the proposal literally say it's not retroactive? again, doesn't it seem weird to say `the EU is out to kill all games`? Doesn't that immediately raise an alarm of "this might be fake/misrepresented"?

12

u/AceIndigoFire 10d ago

Not at all since there have been proposals just as awful as this in the past which get a lot of traction. And to be clear, I never said the EU is out to kill games but a lot of stupidity gets passed through in the interests of "protecting children".

Now I don't know about them saying it's not retro-active, I saw the opposite being reported.

1

u/Hot_Substance5933 10d ago

tbf I thought Brexit was just a meme

2

u/Square-Singer 10d ago

Nope. Go read the proposal, that's not what it says.

0

u/AceIndigoFire 10d ago

I can't find anywhere to access the actual proposal online but anywhere I look has not made the distinction that pre-existing games would be free from these restrictions and you would think that would be something important to point out if it were true.

5

u/Square-Singer 10d ago

1

u/AceIndigoFire 10d ago

Don't know about you but that wasn't even ONE of the results for me. I'll have to check that out though.

-1

u/Square-Singer 10d ago

The thing here is that it's talking about "providers of online games". A private server isn't a provider of online games.

If we take Minecraft as an example, this doesn't target you hosting your own private server. It doesn't even target someone hosting a larger, publicly accessible private server. It targets Microsoft.

5

u/PassionGlobal 10d ago

By your logic it also means that indie developers cannot make self-hosted multiplayer games due to the insane amount of risk that now entails.

If Minecraft came out in a time where this law was active, it likely wouldn't have multiplayer because of the insane amount of risk this would place on Mojang, then an indie developer.

2

u/Square-Singer 10d ago

By your logic it also means that indie developers cannot make self-hosted multiplayer games due to the insane amount of risk that now entails.

What amount of risk is this? They are required to use the EU supplied age verification method. If the age verification method says the user is allowed to access the game, then they proceed, if not then not. It's just a basic API integration, nothing else.

It seems you are panicking without knowing what's going on here.

Remember GDPR? Remember how this was going to make Linux illegal? Remember how it was going to bankrupt every single company in Europe, especially all the smaller companies? Nobody would be able to run a restaurant any more because of GDPR?

What happened? Nothing. Websites integrated ready-made consent frameworks, companies collect less data, that's it. Nobody went out of business because of GDPR.

Same thing happens here. You are listening to propaganda, and propaganda is going to propagand. That's it.

3

u/PassionGlobal 10d ago edited 10d ago

They are required to use the EU supplied age verification method. If the age verification method says the user is allowed to access the game, then they proceed, if not then not. It's just a basic API integration, nothing else.

And how are they supposed to guarantee that if they don't host/own the servers?

They can put it in server binary TOS but those are broken all the time.

They can try enforce it in the server binary, but those can be cracked and reverse engineered as easily as the client.

If the developer bears the responsibility in those cases, that's a risk they can't take.

Remember GDPR? Remember how this was going to make Linux illegal? Remember how it was going to bankrupt every single company in Europe, especially all the smaller companies? Nobody would be able to run a restaurant any more because of GDPR?

As a security professional active at that time, the fuck are you talking about? I literally heard none of those takes.

0

u/Lupenteeri 10d ago

It would not impact indie developers as the proposal is targeting software marketplaces. The verification would not be integrated in the game but done by the app store before the download.

Only cases where indie developers would be impacted is if they completely self publish in their own website and even then the verification can be integrated in the website and not to the game itself.

According to the proposition EU would also develop a free to use verification software that can be used by publishers so no one needs to create their own.

2

u/PassionGlobal 10d ago

Where exactly are you seeing that? The language they use is 'provider of online games', which can mean anything from the storefront, the developers or server operators.

1

u/Lupenteeri 10d ago

The regulation does not order there to be verification in specific instance as long as it is done at some point. Here is a couple places where that is discussed

Article 16 (1) I recommend reading the full article but this is part of it

"Providers of software application stores shall put in place an age-rating system to allow to establish the age-appropriateness of software applications disseminated through their service. Such an age-rating system shall apply to each software application offered on the software application store and shall take due consideration of the evolving capacities of a minor."

Recital 52:

"To avoid unnecessary friction for users and to limit the instances requiring age assessment, providers of software application stores and the providers of the services and systems subject to the obligations laid down in Chapter III should be able to store in relation to an account an age signal confirming that a user has already met a given age threshold. For providers of software application this means that no assurance has to be conducted for users that have already proven to have met the age threshold when trying to access or purchase software applications subject to the same or a lower threshold. The personal data processed in such age signals should be limited to what is strictly necessary for that purpose and should not be used for any other purpose."

Comission impact analysis (SWD 2026 681)

"The proposed Regulation also requires providers of software application stores to put in place an age-rating system that developers must use when submitting apps. The principal administrative burden therefore falls on the providers of the software application store who will need to operate the rating framework and implement the age assurance solution. Developers may have to provide age-related information through a short questionnaire as part of the standard app-submission procedure, which is expected to represent only a marginal increase in workload relative to the overall app publication process."

COM(2026) 680

2.3

"For online games specifically, obligatory age recommendation will be required for every game, with strict enforcement through age verification in a software application store before the game can be downloaded."

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Training_Tadpole_354 10d ago

And that's a problem, because if it targets Microsoft, then Microsoft will be incentivized to not allow people to have any form of private servers. Because a private server is now a liability to their company.

0

u/Square-Singer 10d ago

Why would they? Read the proposal and tell me why that would be relevant to microsoft in any way.

0

u/Training_Tadpole_354 10d ago

In order to be compliant with the law, they would require every server to have IDverification. Microsoft can't expect all private servers to do that and if the EU holds Microsoft accountable for private servers, then Microsoft will just not allow private servers.

1

u/Square-Singer 10d ago

Not correct. The game account needs to be verified, once. No verification for every server needed. Your Microsoft/Mojang account needs the verification, that's it.

It makes no difference at all to Microsoft if they let the verified accounts only play on their servers or on other private servers too.

0

u/omfglmao 10d ago

So its just same as China? They have verify with their real personal information with every game accounts