Stop Killing Games: Debate in the British Parliament

Contents

The initiative of the "Stop Killing Games" project was discussed in the British Parliament last week. It advocates for publishers no longer being allowed to simply shut down games after a certain period.

Although the UK government had already commented on the request in advance and indicated that it would not change relevant laws, the initiative's petition, with around 190,000 signatures, had crossed the threshold of the necessary 100,000 signatures for it to be discussed in the House of Commons. The British Minister for Sport, Tourism, Civil Society and Youth, Stephanie Peacock, faced questions from MPs.

The essential demand of Stop Killing Games: Game developers must ensure a perspective for their games after the official end of support. The initiative suggested continued operation, for example, by fans. The trigger for Stop Killing Games was the case of the MMO racing game "The Crew", which Ubisoft had shut down on April 1, 2024 after ten years. The successor "The Crew 2" can now be played offline.

A Cultural Loss

Member of Parliament Henry Tufnell delivered a number of contributions to the debate and referred to the cultural loss in cases like "The Crew". "As the activists rightly argued, we would consider it a cultural tragedy if every copy of a book, film, or song were destroyed. We should view the loss of video games in the same way."

It should not be possible to intentionally deactivate all sold copies of a game, leaving consumers with nothing, emphasized MP Mark Sewards. It is comparable to other products, such as an electronics company ending support for an old printer, as it "still prints documents." He did not mention, however, that the corresponding cartridges for an old printer should also always be available.

Too Great an Impact on the Industry

Peacock showed understanding for the ideas of Stop Killing Games, but from the perspective of the video game industry, the proposal is difficult to implement. The government fears "negative technical impacts" on the development of video games. "It is true that there are some games where it would be relatively easy to add an offline mode after the initial release, but for games whose systems are specifically designed for an online experience, this would not be possible without extensive redevelopment," Peacock noted. The demand for an end-of-life plan for all games would fundamentally change the way games are developed and distributed. This proposal is by no means easy or inexpensive to implement.

The idea of handing over a game to its fans after the official end of support is particularly legally sensitive. Especially regarding who would then be legally responsible for ensuring the game remains secure and complies with legal regulations. "Potential confusion that leads to blame being sought from the original developer or its reputation being otherwise damaged," Peacock cautioned.

Better Communication Needed

While Peacock fundamentally stuck to the government's stance of not changing current law, "The laws work, but companies need to communicate better here," Peacock said. Game developers would therefore have to inform their customers better about when a video game is likely to become unplayable. To this end, the government is considering commissioning the consumer protection organization Chartered Trading Standards Institute to develop guidelines. She also repeatedly emphasized that the British government recognizes the cultural value of video games.

There is also the EU-wide petition "Stop Destroying Games" with the same concern. This also reached the necessary signatures, in this case one million. They are currently being verified for authenticity. Once this is ensured, the European Parliament will have to deal with the petition.

(nen)