Stop Killing Games: the battle to preserve the games we buy
The video game industry is at a new crossroads: the possibility that a title disappears forever even if it was legally purchased. In the face of this reality, Stop Killing Games is born, a European citizens’ initiative that seeks to protect access to video games after their servers are shut down or they are pulled from sale.
What does the initiative consist of?
Driven by content creator Ross Scott —known for his channel “Accursed Farms”—, this proposal was officially launched as a European Citizens’ Initiative. The goal is to ensure that video games don’t disappear by unilateral decision of the companies, and that, once purchased, users can keep accessing them, even if official support ends.
The trigger was the case of Ubisoft’s game The Crew, whose removal in 2024 left thousands of people without access, even though they had acquired it legally. This kind of practice, increasingly common, raises a legitimate concern: what does it really mean to “buy” a digital video game?
What does Stop Killing Games propose?
- Guarantee access to purchased games even after official servers shut down.
- Allow offline versions or make private servers possible to keep titles active.
- Not apply these rules retroactively, but to new releases, to give the industry time to adapt.
The approach doesn’t seek to punish or hinder innovation, but to prevent the arbitrary disappearance of cultural products that, for millions of players, represent not just entertainment, but also collective memory.
Support and criticism
The proposal has received support from various sectors, including independent developers, figures like Notch (creator of Minecraft), and communities dedicated to digital preservation. For them, guaranteeing the right to access after purchase is a basic matter of respect for the consumer.
— Ross Scott, creator of the initiative
On the other hand, bodies like Video Games Europe —which represents large corporations in the sector— openly oppose it. They argue that the initiative is imprecise, that it would increase development costs, and that it would introduce legal and technical risks by forcing the existence of offline or public versions.
This reaction is to be expected: the initiative represents democratic pressure on an industry that has operated without many legal restrictions in this field. The controversy is, in a way, a symptom that the debate has already begun.
What could happen now?
The initiative has already surpassed the million signatures required in the European Union, though they still have to be officially validated. If confirmed, the European Commission would be legally obligated to consider the case and issue a formal response, which could include proposing new laws to protect access to digital goods.
This could not only change the way video games are distributed in Europe. It could also set jurisprudence —that is, legal precedents— that inspire regulations in other regions of the world.
A broader discussion
Beyond video games, Stop Killing Games raises a discussion about consumer rights in the digital age. What happens when we buy something that depends exclusively on servers or infrastructure we don’t control? What rights do we have as users when the terms of use change, or when the product disappears?
These questions go beyond entertainment. They have to do with how we relate to technology, ownership, and digital culture. In that sense, this initiative represents a first attempt —modest but relevant— to balance the scales between corporations and citizens in the digital arena.
Where can I sign?
Only people with citizenship of the European Union or the United Kingdom can sign, and they must do so on the official platform:
Sign on the official European Union page
You can also visit the campaign’s information site: www.stopkillinggames.com