The Stop Killing Games Petition: A Complex Issue

Why the Petition Fails to Propose a Clear Way Forward

The Stop Killing Games petition, started by YouTuber Ross Scott, has garnered significant attention in the gaming community. While the initiative’s intention is commendable, it risks causing more harm than good. The petition fails to propose a clear and proportionate solution to the issue of online games being taken offline.

Technical Distinction Between Offline and Online Games

Not all games are created equal. There’s a fundamental technical distinction between offline-first games and online-server dependent games. Offline games are designed to run entirely on local hardware, while online games rely on server-side systems for gameplay logic, progression, anti-cheat systems, and more.

• Offline games are designed to run entirely on local hardware.
• Online games rely on server-side systems for gameplay logic, progression, and more.

Why Releasing Server Code is Not a Viable Option

Even if a developer wanted to release the server code, they would likely be in breach of their contractual obligations. Server codes often use licensed middleware that developers do not own and cannot legally redistribute.

“Even if a developer wanted to release the server code, they would most likely be in breach of their contractual obligations by doing so.”

Preserving Culturally Significant Games: A Complex Issue

Gaming sits in a unique position within the entertainment industry. Unlike films, books, or music, many modern games are not self-contained works but live services built around server-based architectures, ongoing content updates, and interactive systems that require constant maintenance and third-party licensing.

Characteristics	Description
Server-based architectures	Online games rely on server-side systems for gameplay logic, progression, and more.
Ongoing content updates	Games receive regular updates with new content, features, and fixes.
Interactive systems	Games require constant maintenance and third-party licensing to function.

A Balanced Approach to Preservation

Preserving these experiences isn’t as simple as slapping some files on GitHub and calling it a day. It often means reconstructing an entire ecosystem, which was never designed to function independently or indefinitely.

• Preserving experiences requires reconstructing an entire ecosystem.
• This process is often complex and costly.

Consumer Rights and IP Law

In the UK, consumers don’t ‘own’ most games in the way they might think. Most digital games are licensed under an End User Licence Agreement (EULA), which limits the scope of what users can do with the product.

Definition:

End User Licence Agreement (EULA):

A licence to use a digital service, not a transfer of IP ownership.

Realistic Solutions

The Stop Killing Games initiative raises an important issue: consumers deserve more clarity, and culturally significant online games should not vanish without a trace. However, preservation shouldn’t be mandated by misguided discourse.

• Mandatory digital service labelling is a viable solution.
• Tiered preservation frameworks provide flexible options for developers.

Mandatory Digital Service Labelling

Games could be required to disclose – in a prominent, clear, and transparent manner at the point of sale – whether they are’server-dependent.’ This consumer transparency approach would help consumers to appreciate the nature of what they are purchasing, make informed decisions, and avoid the frustration of losing access to a product they believed they ‘owned.’

Benefits of Mandatory Digital Service Labelling

• Consumer transparency.
• Informed purchasing decisions.
• Avoiding frustration.

Tiered Preservation Frameworks

A tiered preservation framework would provide flexible, practical options for how online games are ended. Developers could choose one of three tiers, each reflecting different levels of preservation effort and resource commitment:

• Tier 1: Providing limited offline modes.
• Tier 2: Partnerships with preservation institutions under controlled access.
• Tier 3: Escrow arrangements or private server licenses with limitations.

Empowering Consumers

Crucially, whichever option a developer opts for must be communicated transparently and prominently to consumers at the point of sale. This empowers players to make informed purchasing decisions and effectively ‘vote with their wallets’ by supporting games and developers whose preservation approach aligns with their expectations.

Conclusion

The Stop Killing Games campaign does raise an important issue: consumers deserve more clarity, and culturally significant online games should not vanish without a trace. However, preservation shouldn’t be mandated by misguided discourse. By proposing realistic solutions, such as mandatory digital service labelling and tiered preservation frameworks, we can balance developer flexibility, commercial realities, and consumer rights. Preservation matters, but how we get there matters too.