The unfortunate reality of modern gaming isn’t just that most content is now created by radical feminists who disdain consumers, fixated on superficial short-term profits by adhering to BlackRock’s ESG and DEI initiatives aimed at eradicating femininity and emphasizing diversity and inclusion by assigning fictional characters artificial values based on their marginalization.
Another sad aspect is the prevalence of live service titles. The days of simply buying a physical disc, inserting it, and playing are long gone. Most modern video games require a constant online connection and are destined to become unplayable after a certain period or if the game fails catastrophically.
Companies like Ubisoft are pushing consumers to accept the idea of not truly owning the games they purchase. Recently, Ubisoft terminated the services for its always-online racing MMO “The Crew” and even removed the game from the digital libraries of those who owned it.
In the past year alone, dozens of games have been taken offline or become unplayable due to their reliance on an online connection.
One of the biggest offenders is Square Enix, which has discontinued support for several of its mobile gacha games that failed to generate sufficient profit for the struggling Japanese company.
This situation has sparked a campaign to create a legal framework ensuring that games remain playable even after their servers are shut down.
Leading this effort is Ross Scott with his “Stop Killing Games” initiative, which aims to change how gaming companies manage their titles, addressing concerns about media preservation and consumer rights.
The enthusiasm surrounding the initiative suggests a community eager for change and protection in the gaming landscape. Scott has helped plan and launch a European Union petition seeking 1 million signatures to push for laws banning such practices by game developers or publishers.
The European Union, alongside the Australian government, has a history of imposing regulatory changes that affect big businesses, including the video games industry, in relation to antitrust violations and more.
Meanwhile, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission took legal action against Valve for breaching Australian consumer law concerning refund policies and consumer guarantees. The Australian federal court ruled against Valve, resulting in significant changes to Steam’s refund policy to comply with Australian consumer protection laws, including increased eligibility for refunds within 14 days of purchase and an automated refund process.
If the petition reaches one million signatures, it could potentially become law. This would be a godsend for consumers but a significant challenge for game companies, particularly Sony, which focuses on live service titles like Concord, Marathon, and Helldivers 2, which lacks offline play and requires a constant internet connection.
The Stop Killing Games initiative aims to ensure that games remain in a “reasonable working state” when their online services are shut down or support ends. It also seeks to prohibit any requirements for video games to connect to the publisher or affiliated parties after support ends, which would apply to games that sell assets such as microtransactions.
This proposition is straightforward, aiming to prevent game developers or publishers from rendering games unplayable. It emphasizes consumer rights, which are often violated by corporations selling products designed with an expiry date.
Another goal of the initiative is to allow fans to host their own servers for online multiplayer games after official servers are taken offline.
Some games, like Babylon’s Fall by Square Enix were available for around a year before becoming completely unplayable, even for those who owned them.
Other games likely facing shutdown include Outriders, a failed Destiny clone developed by People Can Fly and published by Square Enix. Outriders initially peaked at 125,000 concurrent players when it released in April 2021, but now struggles to reach a peak player count of less than 300 today.
When its servers are inevitably pulled, the game will be permanently unplayable. The same fate is expected for this year’s release of Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League by Rocksteady Games, which launched to significant disappointment and cost Warner Bros $200 million.
After five years, the critically unsuccessful Evolve by Turtle Rock Studios was permanently shut down when its online servers were turned off on July 6, 2023.
Additionally, countless other games have faced similar fates, including Sony’s Driveclub, which had its online services terminated on March 31, 2020, and Gran Turismo Sport, which was shut down on January 31 of this year.
Gearbox’s failed hero shooter, Battleborn, launched on May 3, 2016, but was removed from sale in November 2019 and became unplayable in January 2021. Countless other games have similarly fallen victim to this trend, which has become increasingly common over time.
The “Stop Killing Games” initiative not only challenges big-name corporations like Ubisoft but also targets free-to-play mobile games such as Goddess of Victory: NIKKE, Blue Archive, Genshin Impact, and Zenless Zone Zero.
These games, which rely on in-game cosmetics and microtransactions, would be affected by the initiative’s declaration that consumers should retain ownership of such purchases indefinitely, even after the games are inevitably shut down.
This is especially relevant for games developed by Square Enix.
Although Scott is an American citizen and ineligible to sign the EU petition, if the initiative is passed into law in Europe, it could set a precedent for similar policies in the Americas and other regions.
Game companies would have to comply with EU regulations to sell their products in the region, and these standards would likely influence practices worldwide, much like how Valve revised its refund policy following legal action in Australia.
The growing trend of making games unplayable raises concerns that in the future, we may truly own nothing and be expected to accept it.
The petition has a year to gather a million signatures, and while reaching that milestone doesn’t guarantee the proposal will become law, it represents a significant opportunity for politicians.
The proposal could be a straightforward legislative win, entailing a blanket ban on rendering games unusable as products owned by consumers. This could include imposing fines on non-compliant companies and potentially barring future game releases in the region, which could be a positive development.
Preserving video games isn’t just about keeping older titles playable; it’s about protecting the digital culture that gaming has created. Publishers should be required to either sell or open-source their server technology if they decide to abandon online service games.
This need became evident with the shutdown of GameSpy, which rendered hundreds of games on not just PC but also Sony’s PlayStation 2, and PlayStation 3 consoles unplayable, including titles from Electronic Arts and Rockstar Games.
While some developers have transitioned online services to alternative platforms, such as 2K migrating the online services of Borderlands from GameSpy to Steamworks, and similar efforts for games like Arma 2 and Serious Sam 2.
Many online multiplayer components on consoles have been lost over time. Nevertheless, dedicated efforts to revive these games have emerged, including methods like IP spoofing LAN connections and “OpenSpy,” a fan-made replacement for GameSpy.
This perspective envisions a future where players are not just consumers but also custodians of gaming history. By allowing the community to maintain these titles through private servers, we could foster a vibrant ecosystem where games continue to thrive long after their official support has ended.
At its core, the “Stop Killing Games” initiative sparks an essential debate about ownership in the digital age. Even as we swiftly embrace new technology, the question of whether consumers truly own the digital content they purchase remains contentious, given that consumers often don’t actually own the software they buy.
This shift towards subscription services, such as Microsoft’s Xbox Game Pass, highlights this issue. The initiative aims to create solutions that ensure games remain playable beyond server shutdowns, encouraging developers to plan for the long-term satisfaction of their communities.
This movement could reshape the landscape of player rights in Europe and set a precedent that will likely be mirrored by other countries, igniting a revolution in how the gaming industry interacts with its community and respects its customers.
Currently, consumers are being exploited by game developers who seem to disdain gamers and “gamer culture.” Prominent corporations are increasingly influenced by ESG initiatives, which focus on creating sanitized, safe, and inoffensive games that prioritize diversity and inclusivity in both hiring and development while game journalists harass consumers as being sexist and racist for refusing to buy games with “woke” themes.
If this initiative were to become law, it would likely cause significant upheaval among major corporations and could even lead to Chinese developers abandoning efforts to make their mobile gacha games available in European regions. I can’t wait to see how this pans out.
