Pro-Gamer Consumer Movement 'Stop Killing Games' Will Launch NGOs in America and the EU (pcgamer.com) 28
The consumer movement Stop Killing Games "has come a long way in the two years since
YouTuber Ross Scott got mad about Ubisoft's
destruction of The Crew in 2024," writes the gaming news site PC Gamer. "The short version is, he won: 1.3 million people signed the group's petition, mandating its consideration by the European Union, and while Ubisoft CEO Yves Guillemot reminded us all that nothing is forever, his company promised to never do something like that again." (And Ubisoft has since updated The Crew 2
with an
offline mode, according to Engadget.)
"But it looks like even bigger things are in store," PC Gamer wrote Thursday, "as Scott announced today that Stop Killing Games is launching two official NGOs, one in the EU and the other in the US." An NGO — that's non-governmental organization — is, very generally speaking, an organization that pursues particular goals, typically but not exclusively political, and that may be funded partially or fully by governments, but is not actually part of any government. It's a big tent: Well-known NGOs include Oxfam, Doctors Without Borders, Amnesty International, and CARE International... "If there's a lobbyist showing up again and again at the EU Commission, that might influence things," [Scott says in a video]. "This will also allow for more watchdog action. If you recall, I helped organize a multilingual site with easy to follow instructions for reporting on The Crew to consumer protection agencies. Well, maybe the NGO could set something like that up for every big shutdown where the game is destroyed in the future...."
Scott said in the video that he doesn't have details, but the two NGOs are reportedly looking at establishing a "global movement" to give Stop Killing Games a presence in other regions.
"According to Scott, these NGOs would allow for 'long-term counter lobbying' when publishers end support for certain video games," Engadget reports" "Let me start off by saying I think we're going to win this, namely the problem of publishers destroying video games that you've already paid for," Scott said in the video. According to Scott, the NGOs will work on getting the original Stop Killing Games petition codified into EU law, while also pursuing more watchdog actions, like setting up a system to report publishers for revoking access to purchased video games... According to Scott, the campaign leadership will meet with the European Commission soon, but is also working on a 500-page legal paper that reveals some of the industry's current controversial practices.
"But it looks like even bigger things are in store," PC Gamer wrote Thursday, "as Scott announced today that Stop Killing Games is launching two official NGOs, one in the EU and the other in the US." An NGO — that's non-governmental organization — is, very generally speaking, an organization that pursues particular goals, typically but not exclusively political, and that may be funded partially or fully by governments, but is not actually part of any government. It's a big tent: Well-known NGOs include Oxfam, Doctors Without Borders, Amnesty International, and CARE International... "If there's a lobbyist showing up again and again at the EU Commission, that might influence things," [Scott says in a video]. "This will also allow for more watchdog action. If you recall, I helped organize a multilingual site with easy to follow instructions for reporting on The Crew to consumer protection agencies. Well, maybe the NGO could set something like that up for every big shutdown where the game is destroyed in the future...."
Scott said in the video that he doesn't have details, but the two NGOs are reportedly looking at establishing a "global movement" to give Stop Killing Games a presence in other regions.
"According to Scott, these NGOs would allow for 'long-term counter lobbying' when publishers end support for certain video games," Engadget reports" "Let me start off by saying I think we're going to win this, namely the problem of publishers destroying video games that you've already paid for," Scott said in the video. According to Scott, the NGOs will work on getting the original Stop Killing Games petition codified into EU law, while also pursuing more watchdog actions, like setting up a system to report publishers for revoking access to purchased video games... According to Scott, the campaign leadership will meet with the European Commission soon, but is also working on a 500-page legal paper that reveals some of the industry's current controversial practices.
Purpose? (Score:1)
I was 85% through TFS before I realized this wasn't about banning games in which players kill things in-game.
Re:Purpose? (Score:5, Informative)
"Stop killing games" is meant to prevent companies from taking actions that render games unplayable ever again. Like a game has always online DRM and then they pull the verification servers even if it's a single-player game.
The goal is to make it law that all games must continue to be playable past their end of life in some way. The specifics are not spelled out, though there are obvious possibilities. Our always-on game I described above could have final patch that removes verification requirements, but as long as the goal of "still playable" is met, problem solved. id Software famously released source code to many of their engines, for example.
Not to be confused with requiring constant maintenance. If the game worked in Win10 but not Win11 and it was EoL before Win11 was released, the devs aren't required to fix that problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Things in games aren't alive so you can't actually kill them.
How would this work exactly? (Score:4, Insightful)
The game Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight by EA requires logging in in order to play the single player (campaign and skirmish). Would this "stop killing games" mean that if EA ever shuts down the login servers, they would have to patch the game to remove the login requirement?
Re:How would this work exactly? (Score:5, Informative)
Yes.
Any online requirements would either need to be disabled, or modified to work with a locally provided service. So if EA couldn't patch out the login entirely, they could also provide a local auth server and patch the game to use that instead.
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:1)
Almost - the petition is not asking for this to be retroactive. So, it won't apply to C&C4 (as that game has already been released), but (assuming the petition results in the laws being changed) it would apply to C&C 5.
Re: (Score:2)
Dune Awakening for example has a lot of single-player content in Hagga Basin and even the Deep Desert (not to mention player-run servers already exist), so a post-support life sounds quite possible.
Re: (Score:2)
The game Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight by EA requires logging in in order to play the single player (campaign and skirmish). Would this "stop killing games" mean that if EA ever shuts down the login servers, they would have to patch the game to remove the login requirement?
Yes. That is the whole point here. There should not be a login requirement for a single player campaign. Even for multiplayer the movement is promoting the world we lived in in the early 2000, i.e. the ability to either host a server locally, or download and run a dedicated server.
Your money, your responsibility (Score:1)
To be fair, when I buy a theatre ticket, the manager is quite clear on, when I will be kicked-out. Software servers do not contain the same honesty but given the obvious cost of operating a server, it obviously will be switched-off, one day. One can argue for fraudulent advertising, at most.
If one doesn't like
Re: (Score:3)
Its not dealing with if WoW suddenly goes offline, or FF14, or any other MMO. Those are online only games, and are strickly based on online gaming modes. They arent going to demand an offline mode or eternally run servers, or anything like that. Not even open sourcing the server code (there are sometimes legal issues with this, go see the whole WinAmp source code issue about why
Re: (Score:2)
If one doesn't like purchased software disappearing, don't buy a game that requires an online account to play: It's called, 'voting with your wallet' and that is your responsibility.
So you're suggesting to not see the movie you want to see because you don't like the terms? The concept of voting with your wallet doesn't work. We live in a world of short attention spans and not owning anything, as such there's no one left for you to vote for, and these days it's akin to giving up your hobby.
NGOs exist precisely for this reason, the reason being that you as an individual are completely fucking irrelevant in a world of corporate greed. Not accepting the terms of service and leaving is defi
Re: (Score:2)
So you're suggesting to not see the movie you want to see because you don't like the terms?
The torrent sites offer better terms.
Re: (Score:2)
The point is more about buying the DVD. Then you expect that you will be able to play it in 30 years if you still find a DVD player.
Re: Your money, your responsibility (Score:2)
Home appliances are dropping dead because of bullshit internet dependencies going dead. Do you really want your movie ticket logic applying to all of your personal possessions?
The consumer's personal responsibilities do not absolve the seller of their social responsibilities, and I'm tied of greedy actors (marketers, politicians, etc) telling us otherwise.
Political remedies aren't just for the rich. We the people can organize and demand political solutions for online privacy, algorithmic pricing, right to r
Re: (Score:2)
Let's say theaters change the terms. Now you will be kicked out randomly, or at some theaters, with a 9 minute warning. This is different than what you are used to happening when you buy a theater ticket, but it's the way things are done now. Time passes, and it's the way things have been done for years. So you pay for your ticket, and in the middle of enjoying a movie, the movie stops, or you're given the 9 minute warning.
Can yo
They don't enforce existing laws (Score:3)
Buying a license is a service, not a good (Score:2)
you're breaking the clause in the Sale of Goods act about the buyer enjoying quiet possession of the goods
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought buying a license to download and use a proprietary computer program was a service, not a good. This differs from buying a physical copy of the same program, such as a CD or DVD. What does the "Sale of Goods Act" have to say about services?
Re: (Score:2)
This sort of thing is already illegal (at least in the UK, and I'm sure many other countries,) existing laws just aren't being enforced. If you purport to "sell" something but it will actually stop working at some point when you do something of your own due to how you've programmed it, then that's not suitable for the purpose it's advertised for, you're breaking the clause in the Sale of Goods act about the buyer enjoying quiet possession of the goods, and it's a deliberate implied false representation, so that's fraud.
The thing is, it's never been tested in court and won't be until a major game is shut down.
Why Games? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why the focus on games?
The FAQ [stopkillinggames.com] does not address why scope was limited to video games within the broader market for downloadable software. If I had to guess: Limiting the petition's scope to video games takes advantage of existing consumer protection laws and norms that address the power imbalance between large corporate merchants and individuals. Because home users have far less power to negotiate terms of sale than businesses have, some countries' legal systems apply more restrictions on the sale of products and services for hom
Just make games playable offline w/o server. (Score:2)
DFA (Score:2)
The EU Digital Fairness Act proposal will be presented soon and would address exactly that, plus dark patterns.
Were bank robbers the heroes in comic books? (Score:2)
Banks soft enslaved a generation in student loans then brought in foreigners to take the nation from them...
With banks so evil and vile... Is robbing a bank really a crime or an act of fighting for freedom?
Maybe bankrobbers were the heroes all along...