I didn't.
After reading the rest of your comment, you are reading the wrong thing from it, the physical parts of the amusement park would be the extant binaries you already have. They still run the same as they did before, but without maintenance they will deteriorate and become non-functional or only partially operational. In an online system there are server bits that might not be available to the end user and those pieces also need an operator.
To make a slightly more specific analogy, with a water park we could imagine a separate water treatment facility that would need to be run to keep the water in the water park safe. That treatment facility could also have plans and schematics.
The actual facilities in these cases are not independently valuable in the software case. It's the plans and schematics (the source code) that has value... but in both cases you only need the facilities and operators/maintenance to allow people to attend the water park/play the game.
Could the game company also give away a physical treatment plants so that an independent organization could buy their own servers and run their own game servers so that they could still play in their own private water parks? Sure.
Should they? Maybe. But it's specifically the entitlement to the plans/schematics that gets me...
Just in case you missed it in the op:
companies should be forced to open-source games (or at least provide the source code to those who bought it)
This is a good distinction.
Online only play models are difficult for the consumer. I personally don't play that many online only games for partly this reason... and partly because I don't play many online games at all.
It's the designs and schematics part that makes them equivalent.
Again... since you are incapable of holding this though in your brain.
Ridiculing people and ad ideas are two... count them: one (1), two (2)... different things.
Bug: Level D crashes at this location 100% repro. Video attached. Steps:....
Rejected, Need More Info: Can't reproduce on level C.
Edit2: Jesus people, please engage with the actual argument... not some strawman argument I didn't make.
I must be missing something here.
- Company buys land, designs and builds theme park
- Company operates theme park.
- Theme park isn't profitable.
- Company closes theme park
- ???
- Company must give away designs and schematics to theme park rides for free so people can build theme park themselves that might be in direct competition with new theme park company is trying to build???
Edit: I do think that abandonware should be opensourced at some point... but I don't understand this level of entitlement.
We aren't criticizing lonely people. Go take your strawman elsewhere.
Incel/NEET/sigma/Redpill "culture" 100% deserves as much and as frequent derision as fucking possible. The only remotely positive thing these horrendous ideas perpetuate for their target audience is the "grind mindset" (which in itself is horrifying). The only reason the "grind mindset" is helpful in these situations is that it helps people stuck in this world get into the real world.
While true that they are achieved via abstraction, abstraction doesn't create the better software or the more robust systems.
Where do you think this "lost heat" goes?
That's not the analogy I gave.