222
RoboCache the "first decentralized video game distribution and resale platform using the block-chain" shut down in 30 days. Purchases will be lost even if downloaded previously. (lemmy.ca)
submitted 7 months ago by to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca
45 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 7 months ago (2 children)

Am I misundersnding somethings here? It's the ownership/license that is decentralized. So a user could do whatever they wanted with that license (keep it, resell it, give it away). But at the end of the day there always needs to be a way to use that license to download the game files. That's the bit that is shutting down.

This distinction likely doesn't matter to the people losing access to the game, but most of the comments here seem to fundamentally misunderstand the setup here.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Tbf this is the first time I’ve heard of it so have no deeper knowledge than what’s presented here, but it does state a platform shutdown so I assumed the whole lot is being disabled.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    Ya for sure in this case the platform that hosts the downloads is going down, but that was never the promise of distributed platforms like this. It's more like owning a CD that still requires an internet connection to download the updates.

    You're free to give that CD to anyone you want, but if the publisher shuts down the server you're shit out of luck.

    In theory someone else could come along, leverage that some blockchain and let people get access to their games again (this isn't actually going to happen)

    Now I know I'm making a lot of assumptions on how this platform actually implemented blockchain and such, but that is how the technology under the hood works. The part that I assume breaks this is that i bet that the company actually maintained private keys on behalf of the users, and if users didn't actually have their private key then there was actually no benefit to the blockchain and it was just a marketing ploy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent