How long should one support the multiplayer part of a game?

Hey guys,
I was wondering what the best practice concerning multiplayer is. If I create a game using a dedicated server I will have to pay a monthly amount of money for that server to run. Let's say that, after a couple of months, the sales of the game will not suffice anymore to cover the server costs. What should I do then? If I drop the multiplayer support, a part of the game that the players paid for will now be missing. On the other hand, it would be impossible for me to keep the support if I don't have enough money.
What would you do in a situation like that? Are there any legal issues if one were to drop the multiplayer support, as one would essentially take something away from a bought product? How do AAA companies do it when they drop support after a couple of years?

 

You could allow player hosted servers. You can distribute your server application either through steam tools. If you're an indie developer, this will do wonders for your renown.

You could also pull an EA and just throw it into your terms of service that you reserve the right to pull the plug on your whole game and not give a damn. Sometimes they pull a game off the auth server too so you can't even do the singleplayer. I'm sure anything you do will leave you with more respect than EA.

They do it with little concern for their player base. I didn't really play this one EA game that much since I got it for free with something, but I was still shocked when they shut it down (no single or multi) after only like 2 years. I forget the name of it but the game has some weird starcraft1 looking 3d face on the cover with a claw weapon.

Looked it up, it's darkspore. They kinda just... decided to pull the plug on the auth server and leave the drm on. Thus, you can't be authenticated, thus you have no game.

 

For AAA you can google: EA shutting down servers

 

Alright, who did expect something else from EA

Player hosted servers on the other hand sound like a really good idea. However, this would be not that feasible for scoreboards etc. which should be the same across all community servers. But it's definetely better than just shutting everything down.

 

(AFAIK)No, because software is licensed, not sold, without warranty of any kind.

They shut down servers, ignore users and few years later they also shut down site with user supported mods without warning, if they can. If anyone attempts to do anything about the situation, they'll try to sue them.

Multiplayer shutdown indicates end of the product support. Past that point the product will be effectively dead. If you care about users, it would be preferable to release server software for free to everybody. It would be even better if you release server source code. If your singleplayer experience is interconnected with multiplayer experience in any way, reasonable effort should be made in order to ensure that single player experience would be fully enjoyable without any online servers, especially if the product will be still sold in stores after multiplayer shutdown.

For example, In Mass Effect 3, your multiplayer scores affected endings you would get in single player, and it was most likely impossible to get the best ending in the single player without wasting time in multiplayer maps. That was, of course EA's devious ploy introduced in order to trick players into buying weapon grates with real cash... in RPG game.

Do not EVER do anything like that. Ideally, you want your game to be playable 50 years from now, as long as underlying platform provides compatible api.

 

Just be cool and don't panic

Once the servers are out, modded servers will come up. It's probably for the best that the scoreboard becomes fragmented once that happens.