​

2025 UPDATE: Threshold passed, KEEP SIGNING AND SPREADING THE WORD . One month remains, more signatures means more protection against invalid signatures. Original post below:

A European Citizens Initiative has been launched by the Stop Killing Games campaign, as one of multiple methods being pursued to challenge planned obsolescence in videogames. As summarized by the initiative itself:

This initiative calls to require publishers that sell or license videogames to consumers in the European Union (or related features and assets sold for videogames they operate) to leave said videogames in a functional (playable) state.

Specifically, the initiative seeks to prevent the remote disabling of videogames by the publishers, before providing reasonable means to continue functioning of said videogames without the involvement from the side of the publisher.

If the Citizens Initiative reaches the signature requirement, the European Comission is required to issue a formal reply and explain its decision on if it will or will not propose new EU legislation based on the initiative. The initiative runs for one year, by which time it must have surpassed one million valid signatures.

In order to be eligible for the petition, participants must be:

1. A citizen of a EU country
2. Of voting age

Those wishing to sign can find the Initiative on the ECI website, as well as further information and guides on StopKillingGames's website. The form only requires basic information, but if a mistake is made the signature is invalidated and that individual cannot try again.

The Stop Killing Games campaign was launched by Ross Scott based on the shutdown of Ubisoft's The Crew, a primarily single-player game that nonetheless required an online connection to Ubisoft's servers. Support for the game was dropped in March 2024, rendering it entirely unplayable to those who had purchased it possibly three months prior - despite indications that an offline mode already existed to some degree within the game's code.

If the campaign is successful, publishers could be required to have end-of-life plans for their games: such as a patch to remove connection requirements in cases similar to The Crew, or allowing players to host their own servers for multiplayer games that significantly rely on them. The campaign explicitly does not require anything while support continues.

​

Scott has published numerous videos detailing the different stages and justifications for the campaign, one of which is shown above. Although there is a full year to reach the target, he emphasizes the need for others, especially multilingual and non-English EU citizens, to reach out to those with audiences within the EU.

Source

 

[Dark_Ansem]

There was an attempt prior to the election being called, I don't know if the petition can be restarted now.

Not yet

 

[RAHelllord]

Neat, signed it.

It would also rely on the devs/studio not being shuttered/bankrupted before their titles are sunsetted. Who patches the game then, or faces the legal action this statute mandates?

Obviously if the company goes under and noone buys the license then nobody gets sued and the game just stops existing, and if the license does get bought then obviously the new owner will be on the hook.
I don't see how this is trying to be an argument that this would invalidate or even just complicate any potentially proposed legislation.

 

[Sir Tortoise]

It will have a knock on effect to every type of game from a financial point of view... if all servers have to remain up for eternity, that overhead will need to be covered from more than just the sale of the title using those servers. Imagine if Sega still had to pay for the upkeep of Dreamcasts online functionality - by law they'd be required to, but haven't made any money from the Dreamcast in over twenty years.

This isn't what the campaign is trying to achieve, almost the opposite: for games to remain functional without requiring further action from the publisher, in whatever way they deem best. For games that actually rely on servers, that would probably be to just allow players to run their own servers if they wish.

It would also rely on the devs/studio not being shuttered/bankrupted before their titles are sunsetted. Who patches the game then, or faces the legal action this statute mandates?

I think it would be rather rare for a company to face such rapid annihilation that they can't execute an end of life plan. It would be their responsibility to do so as part of winding things down, and if they didn't because of their offices being bombed or something...well, they'd still be the exception, and thats better than the current situation.

Even in the rare event where a company physically cannot do the work themselves through no fault of their own, a "reasonable" effort in that case might be to release documentation to aid efforts for players to repair the game themselves. Like how fans of The Crew were able to create a server emulator, but they'd be starting with knowledge on how to do so rather than having to reverse engineer the entire thing.

If they specifically chose to neglect forming such a plan or executing it, then that is a problem for law enforcement. "What if they break the law" isn't a counterargument to the law itself.

 

[Flirkyn]

I'm not that hopeful that it'll work, but I'll still gladly sign it

 

[Marc_LFD]

I thought the community already resurrected it with an emulated server?

Have they already done it? I've not read anything since then.

But my point is that Ubisoft should be forced to release a patch to play it offline.

 

[linuxares]

Have they already done it? I've not read anything since then.

But my point is that Ubisoft should be forced to release a patch to play it offline.

I agree.
Or provide the server software so we can self-host.

I hate the live service gaming industry so if it dies, I couldn't be happier personally.

This isn't what the campaign is trying to achieve, almost the opposite: for games to remain functional without requiring further action from the publisher, in whatever way they deem best. For games that actually rely on servers, that would probably be to just allow players to run their own servers if they wish.

People haven't watched the video.

 

[ChaosEternal]

People haven't watched the video.

Or even read the post, considering it says "without the involvement from the side of the publisher."

 

[Bladexdsl]

good luck getting nintendo to agree to this!

 

[BraveDragonWolf]

Can we talk about Bungie/Destiny 2 real quick?

It's hilarious I shit you not...

 

[The Catboy]

Ngl, I really dislike how much global overreach the EU and Europeans seem to have. This is a great idea but it’s also yet another example of overreach

 

[linuxares]

Ngl, I really dislike how much global overreach the EU and Europeans seem to have. This is a great idea but it’s also yet another example of overreach

You mean you buy something and it at anytime can get yanked away is an overreaction?

 

[Miloemulator]

good, i only play singleplayer games anyway

View attachment 450464
​

A European Citizens Initiative has been launched by the Stop Killing Games campaign, as one of multiple methods being pursued to challenge planned obsolescence in videogames. As summarized by the initiative itself:



If the Citizens Initiative reaches the signature requirement, the European Comission is required to issue a formal reply and explain its decision on if it will or will not propose new EU legislation based on the initiative. The initiative runs for one year, by which time it must have surpassed one million valid signatures.

In order to be eligible for the petition, participants must be:

1. A citizen of a EU country
2. Of voting age

Those wishing to sign can find the Initiative on the ECI website, as well as further information and guides on StopKillingGames's website. The form only requires basic information, but if a mistake is made the signature is invalidated and that individual cannot try again.

The Stop Killing Games campaign was launched by Ross Scott based on the shutdown of Ubisoft's The Crew, a primarily single-player game that nonetheless required an online connection to Ubisoft's servers. Support for the game was dropped in March 2024, rendering it entirely unplayable to those who had purchased it possibly three months prior - despite indications that an offline mode already existed to some degree within the game's code.

If the campaign is successful, publishers could be required to have end-of-life plans for their games: such as a patch to remove connection requirements in cases similar to The Crew, or allowing players to host their own servers for multiplayer games that significantly rely on them. The campaign explicitly does not require anything while support continues.

​

Scott has published numerous videos detailing the different stages and justifications for the campaign, one of which is shown above. Although there is a full year to reach the target, he emphasizes the need for others, especially multilingual and non-English EU citizens, to reach out to those with audiences within the EU.

Source

All of the installed games have joined the chat

 

[The Catboy]

You mean you buy something and it at anytime can get yanked away is an overreaction?

I mean European laws and regulations continue to find their way outside of Europe and into my life without my consent or input. As I said, this is still a great idea and I am honestly about it. I just wish it wasn’t another example of European overreach. It would be nicer if things effecting Europe but the outside of Europe could have the input those it’s effecting.

 

[Marc_LFD]

I mean European laws and regulations continue to their way outside of Europe and into my life without my consent or input. As I said, this is still a great idea and I am honestly about it. I just wish it wasn’t another example of European overreach. It would be nicer if things effecting Europe but the outside of Europe could have the input those it’s effecting.

In Apple's case, it's safe to say most are happy Apple was forced to switch to USB-C than still use the Lighting port.

And the alternative app stores are a good thing too, but that's not what "side loading apps" actually meant.

 

[The Catboy]

In Apple's case, it's safe to say most are happy Apple was forced to switch to USB-C than still use the Lighting port.

And the alternative app stores are a good thing too, but that's not what "side loading apps" actually meant.

I am happy, but I also dislike how much influence Europe has been rapidly gaining on the lives of people outside of the EU. Even of it’s often good, I still have my concerns. I personally prefer less EU in my life as someone not in the EU or have more of a say. Simply put, if an EU law, regulation, or movement is going to find it’s way outside of the EU, those effected should also have a say in what’s happening. Otherwise it’s just another example of their overreach on the global stage

 

[Avalyn]

Neat, signed it.


Obviously if the company goes under and noone buys the license then nobody gets sued and the game just stops existing, and if the license does get bought then obviously the new owner will be on the hook.
I don't see how this is trying to be an argument that this would invalidate or even just complicate any potentially proposed legislation.

People here like to cherry pick and complain it seems. Just like everywhere else on the internet.

 

[linuxares]

without my consent or input

As does US laws creeping in to European laws. Thats how they work. People see, wanna adopt.
So far what I've seen the EU slapping these companies with a net plus.

 

[The Catboy]

As does US laws creeping in to European laws. Thats how they work. People see, wanna adopt.
So far what I've seen the EU slapping these companies with a net plus.

I disagree with US laws creeping into the global stage as well. But I see my position isn’t going anywhere so I will stop

 

[pedro702]

While I fundamentally agree with what this is setting out to achieve, I can't help but think that it is somewhat short-sighted.
If it is put into action it may steer developers future projects into avoiding online functionality entirely. And while I'm not against this, it could mean that the types of games that we are used to just don't get made anymore.

they can just patch the games to be played offline or release the server side code to the public so fans can make their own servers when they are at EOS,its not that hard really, most games that require online at all times is not because they actually need it but because they use it for DRM.Also the ones that do need it they can just share the server code so ppl can host their servers, it takes them literately zero work to share the server code.

Post automatically merged: Aug 1, 2024

good luck getting nintendo to agree to this!

how many online only nintendo games are there...

 

[linuxares]

I disagree with US laws creeping into the global stage as well.

The barbaric copyright laws are works from the US that crept in to the EU for example.