It starts May 12, and ends Sept 12. Let's see what you got!
https://polycount.com/discussion/237047/the-brawl²-tournament
Thoughts on the Stop Killing Games movement?
From the website, ""Stop Killing Games" is a consumer movement started to challenge the legality of publishers destroying video games they have sold to customers. An increasing number of video games are sold effectively as goods - with no stated expiration date - but designed to be completely unplayable as soon as support from the publisher ends. This practice is a form of planned obsolescence and is not only detrimental to customers, but makes preservation effectively impossible. Furthermore, the legality of this practice is largely untested in many countries."
From Citizens' Initiative
Objectives
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.
The initiative does not seek to acquire ownership of said videogames, associated intellectual rights or monetization rights, neither does it expect the publisher to provide resources for the said videogame once they discontinue it while leaving it in a reasonably functional (playable) state.
Annex
Videogames have grown into an industry with billions of customers worth hundreds of billions of euros. During this time, a specific business practice in the industry has been slowly emerging that is not only an assault on basic consumer rights but is destroying the medium itself.
An increasing number of publishers are selling videogames that are required to connect through the internet to the game publisher, or "phone home" to function. While this is not a problem in itself, when support ends for these types of games, very often publishers simply sever the connection necessary for the game to function, proceed to destroy all working copies of the game, and implement extensive measures to prevent the customer from repairing the game in any way.
This practice is effectively robbing customers of their purchases and makes restoration impossible. Besides being an affront on consumer rights, videogames themselves are unique creative works. Like film, or music, one cannot be simply substituted with another. By destroying them, it represents a creative loss for everyone involved and erases history in ways not possible in other mediums.
Existing laws and consumer agencies are ill-prepared to protect customers against this practice. The ability for a company to destroy an item it has already sold to the customer long after the fact is not something that normally occurs in other industries. With license agreements required to simply run the game, many existing consumer protections are circumvented. This practice challenges the concept of ownership itself, where the customer is left with nothing after "buying" a game.
We wish to invoke Article 17 §1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union [EUR-Lex - 12012P/TXT - EN - EUR-Lex (europa.eu)] – “No one may be deprived of his or her possessions, except in the public interest and in the cases and under the conditions provided for by law, subject to fair compensation being paid in good time for their loss.” – This practice deprives European citizens of their property by making it so that they lose access to their product an indeterminate/arbitrary amount of time after the point of sale. We wish to see this remedied, at the core of this Initiative.
We also invoke Title XV of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)[EUR-Lex - 12012E/TXT - EN - EUR-Lex (europa.eu)] and the following TFEU Articles as our justification for and the Union’s imperative to respond to this initiative:
Article 169 – Per §1, the EU has an obligation “to promote the interests of consumers and to ensure a high level of consumer protection…to protecting the health, safety and economic interests of consumers”. We believe this practice infringes upon or requires correction to be commensurate with the EU’s obligation. The actions taken in response to this initiative must supersede any end user license agreements associated with videogames.
Article 12 – “Consumer protection requirements shall be taken into account in defining and implementing other Union policies and activities.” Given that this practice extends across Member States and beyond the EU, the Union’s actions regarding this practice ought to keep consumer protection in mind. The actions taken in response to this initiative must supersede any end user license agreements associated with videogames.
Article 114, §3 – “The Commission, in its proposals envisaged in paragraph 1 concerning health, safety, environmental protection and consumer protection, will take as a base a high level of protection… Within their respective powers, the European Parliament and the Council will also seek to achieve this objective” This practice undermines the high level of consumer protection that the Commission, the European Parliament, and the Council takes as the basis of law in the Union, and their objectives of establishing and maintaining the functioning of an internal market as described in §1 of this Article, and Article 26 TFEU.
It is headed by Ross Scott over on yubble tubbles https://www.youtube.com/@Accursed_Farms
Replies
Like, there are many old copies of Diablo 1 and 2 in the world, but what if the publisher decides to completely shut down Diablo 3 and 4 one day?
"What about those that are locked so firmly (usually behind some hardcore anti-pirating systems), they simply can't exist outside their platform (or even with unstable internet connection)?"
I believe the idea is that without requiring continued support, the studio/publisher would have to provide at the very least a way to run a custom server, or provide sufficient source code to do so. Similarly to Rising Thunder Community Edition, which was never even released but can still be played :
https://gamermatters.com/cancelled-fighting-game-rising-thunder-rises-again-as-developers-makes-servers-open-source/
https://github.com/RiotGames/rtce-server
Various Youtube channels are spreading the word about it.
initiative has passed 100k signatures
Great news.Nintendo, Epic Games, EA, Embracer, Microsoft, Sony, Take2, Ubisoft, Bandai Namco, Square Enix,Warner Bros. Games, Level Infinite as well as the UK,Belgium, German and French lobby groups.
https://www.videogameseurope.eu/news/statement-on-stop-killing-games/
I support the spirit of this fully. I don't think you can effectively legislate it
These characters & experiences you have in-game are a part of you, and it'd be neat to have it on a shelf IRL.
This isn't even all that unrealistic for new projects/engines - It is extremely unrealistic though, if you're someone who works on a legacy codebase containing thousands of instances where some code doesn't appear to do anything but if you remove it the game crashes when you enter the konami code on a tuesday.