​

The Video Game History Foundation, in partnership with the Software Preservation Network, have unveiled a new study regarding the current state of classic video games and their commercial availability today.

The results obtained in the study for the US; which goes into great detail going all the way back in 1960, going through each of the video game generations up to 2009, and how much of their library has been preserved or is available to any extend in the modern day, has shown that overall a minuscule 13% of all classic video games up to that date are currently available in some form in the modern day. To make matters worse, their study revealed that no video game generation has even surpassed the 20% mark when it comes to availability.

Availability rate of historical games, by period, between 1960 and 2009. (n = 1500, ±2.5%, 95% CI)
​

Basically, it means that nearly around 8 or 9 out of 10 games, the user has to go out of their way to access these classics, from options going to retaining the original releases (alongside their hardware, both in working conditions that is), to travel to another country's library, and of course, the most common form of piracy, or "self-preservation" as some might call it.

The goal of this study is expand the exceptions that libraries and organizations focused on preservation get, which for some reason seem to be heavily limited compared to other media, like movies, books and music, and while the US Copyright Office claims that the industry already does enough to preserve the games, the study shows quite the contrary, with absolutely no sign of it getting better to any extend.

The study brings up this important facts about gaming preservation:

• 87% of classic games are not in release, and are considered critically endangered
• Availability is low across every platform and time period tracked in the study
• Libraries and archives can digitally preserve, but not digitally share video games, and can provide on-premises access only
• Libraries and archives are allowed to digitally share other media types, such as books, film, and audio, and are not restricted to on-premises access
• The Entertainment Software Association, the video game industry’s lobbying group, has consistently fought against expanding video game preservation within libraries and archives

The culprit of the limitation is the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act), Title 17, section 1201 according to VGHF. The DMCA will have a new rulemaking proceedure scheduled for 2024, which they hope the study will help to make a change into the limiting DMCA law.

Video Game History Foundation Study

 

[Reploid]

Thank god for not so legal methods

 

[shaunj66]

Our redemption arc.

 

[Kioku]

Too bad this study won’t mean much. It just adds to the depressing fact that game companies like Nintendo couldn’t care less about the consumer having options to explore retro libraries.

 

[LeyendaV]

They only made up these numbers so the graphic can look like Pac-Man. We won't be fooled.

 

[Deleted member 663632]

a

 

[smileyhead]

There needs to be a law that makes it legal to distribute out-of-print/abandonware games without any repercussions. If the company isn't selling it nor are they making any profit from someone reselling their game (often at hugely inflated prices), why should we care about the copyright?

 

[pustal]

There needs to be a law that makes it legal to distribute out-of-print/abandonware games without any repercussions. If the company isn't selling it nor are they making any profit from someone reselling their game (often at hugely inflated prices), why should we care about the copyright?

View attachment 382825

Copyright should be cut down drastically too.

 

[VinsCool]

There needs to be a law that makes it legal to distribute out-of-print/abandonware games without any repercussions. If the company isn't selling it nor are they making any profit from someone reselling their game (often at hugely inflated prices), why should we care about the copyright?

Up to a certain number of years after the initial distribution, all things really should become Public Domain, and become free to use and/or redistribute without having to settle arguments over fair use in courtrooms, in my opinion.

The copyright system is a double edged sword, and those with ill intentions will do anything to keep exclusive rights on things, just so they could sell them again and again as limited collector editions without considering the fact that it is most likely impossible to find elsewhere for a reasonable price anymore.

It is sad how certain people only care about banking the sales, and don't actually do the efforts to make any of their products available to everyone.
People ultimately discover there is no way to find said products again without resorting on scalpers inflating prices for their own benefits, or buying cheap bootleg versions, or simply go find things online via piracy.

Big corporations even have the audacity to pull out the surprised Pikachu face when they realise most people will just pick the 3rd option for the sake of convenience.

 

[MikaDubbz]

There needs to be a law that makes it legal to distribute out-of-print/abandonware games without any repercussions. If the company isn't selling it nor are they making any profit from someone reselling their game (often at hugely inflated prices), why should we care about the copyright?

View attachment 382825

I like the thought, but I can understand why devs wouldn't be keen on this if they intend to release classic collections, or plan to remaster or remake such past classic games.

I think ultimately the system in place is fine, emulating classic roms may not be completely legal, but no one, not even Nintendo, is going after the individuals that choose to emulate such classic games to begin with. They all turn a blind eye to this stuff while saying how no one should do it. And yeah, they'll go after the places that supply the roms to download from time to time, so just don't be a supplier haha.

 

[Deleted member 663632]

a

 

[Kioku]

There needs to be a law that makes it legal to distribute out-of-print/abandonware games without any repercussions. If the company isn't selling it nor are they making any profit from someone reselling their game (often at hugely inflated prices), why should we care about the copyright?

View attachment 382825

I don’t disagree but all they’d have to do is find a loophole, and they will…

 

[Deleted member 194275]

That's bullshit.

There are millions of people hoarding video games, even the irrelevant ones are being preserved.

"critically endangered" are the white rhinos, video games are fine, are great actually. Books, movies, music, none of those has the amount of hoarders video games have.

 

[Ryab]

View attachment 382811
​

The Video Game History Foundation, in partnership with the Software Preservation Network, have unveiled a new study regarding the current state of classic video games and their commercial availability today.

The results obtained in the study for the US; which goes into great detail going all the way back in 1960, going through each of the video game generations up to 2009, and how much of their library has been preserved or is available to any extend in the modern day, has shown that overall a minuscule 13% of all classic video games up to that date are currently available in some form in the modern day. To make matters worse, their study revealed that no video game generation has even surpassed the 20% mark when it comes to availability.

View attachment 382816
Availability rate of historical games, by period, between 1960 and 2009. (n = 1500, ±2.5%, 95% CI)
​

Basically, it means that nearly around 8 or 9 out of 10 games, the user has to go out of their way to access these classics, from options going to retaining the original releases (alongside their hardware, both in working conditions that is), to travel to another country's library, and of course, the most common form of piracy, or "self-preservation" as some might call it.

The goal of this study is expand the exceptions that libraries and organizations focused on preservation get, which for some reason seem to be heavily limited compared to other media, like movies, books and music, and while the US Copyright Office claims that the industry already does enough to preserve the games, the study shows quite the contrary, with absolutely no sign of it getting better to any extend.

The study brings up this important facts about gaming preservation:

• 87% of classic games are not in release, and are considered critically endangered
• Availability is low across every platform and time period tracked in the study
• Libraries and archives can digitally preserve, but not digitally share video games, and can provide on-premises access only
• Libraries and archives are allowed to digitally share other media types, such as books, film, and audio, and are not restricted to on-premises access
• The Entertainment Software Association, the video game industry’s lobbying group, has consistently fought against expanding video game preservation within libraries and archives

The culprit of the limitation is the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act), Title 17, section 1201 according to VGHF. The DMCA will have a new rulemaking proceedure scheduled for 2024, which they hope the study will help to make a change into the limiting DMCA law.

Video Game History Foundation Study

Well yeah, the game industry wasnt really that big until Nintendo came in with the NES. After that the entire industry finally started coming together. Though mostly from Japanese companies.

 

[Deleted member 663632]

a

 

[Kioku]

That's bullshit.

There are millions of people hoarding video games, even the irrelevant ones are being preserved.

"critically endangered" are the white rhinos, video games are fine, are great actually. Books, movies, music, none of those has the amount of hoarders video games have.

You missed the point… by a few thousand miles…

 

[Dust2dust]

I agree with VinsCool's comment. Old games should become public domain after several years have passed without being actively sold. I'd put the bar at 20-25 years after the initial release. After that time, if nobody sells it legally, BAM! It's in the public domain forever! That would help software preservation. But anyway, retro-gaming, although popular among this forum's users, is still pretty much niche. I'd say maybe 5-15% of gamers are regular retro-gamers. Most people are just content to play the latest games on their phones, tablets, PCs or consoles, and don't really care about old games. But as gamers grow older, I'm sure that percentage will increase.

 

[Deleted member 194275]

Unavailable for legal purchase from a first-party. (i.e., not in print or available on any digital storefront)

You missed the point… by a few thousand miles…

"87% of classic games are not in release, and are considered critically endangered"

That's what they said. Unavailable on steam, PSN and switch is not the same as "critically endangered".
By that logic, something around 99% of the books every released are critically endangered, as you can't buy them in bookstores.

 

[Deleted member 663632]

a

 

[AlexMCS]

I agree with VinsCool's comment. Old games should become public domain after several years have passed without being actively sold. I'd put the bar at 20-25 years after the initial release. After that time, if nobody sells it legally, BAM! It's in the public domain forever! That would help software preservation. But anyway, retro-gaming, although popular among this forum's users, is still pretty much niche. I'd say maybe 5-15% of gamers are regular retro-gamers. Most people are just content to play the latest games on their phones, tablets, PCs or consoles, and don't really care about old games. But as gamers grow older, I'm sure that percentage will increase.

Remove the "being actively sold" caveat. It will just make companies release the game every 20-25 years to retain the IP/potential profit.

No idea should be an eternal source of royalty income. None whatsoever.