In Europe, concerns have been raised regarding the legality of shutting down video games without offering methods to restore functionality to consumers, rendering them inaccessible to purchasers. Actions like this may be in violation of the consumer protection law and could have massive consequences going forward for video game developers.
One Labor MP, Mark Sewards, pointed out that not disclosing to consumers that their purchase can be taken away in such a manner is unfair and that if this precedent is maintained, it could be applied to physical goods as well.
Warinder Juss, a British Politician and member of the Labor Party, had this to say regarding the situation: “We do not accept our mobile phones being switched off whenever a company produces a new model and wants us to buy a new model,” He continues, “So why should we allow thousands of pounds worth of games being made unplayable because new games have been introduced?”.
Mark Sewards also had this to say regarding the possible breach in regulations: “Those regulations prohibit traders from hiding information that consumers need to make an informed choice, and yet, when you buy a game today, you are almost never told how long it will remain functional. You are sold a one time purchase, but the publisher reserves the right to terminate it at any time for any reason.”.
The right to the purchased media has been debated, with one of the arguments core ot the pushback against the movement being that it is expensive to maintain a video game and publishers should not be forced to keep them running indefinitely. However, many in the movement for Stop Killing Games have stated that this is not their goal. They wish for companies to provide end-of-service support that would allow consumers to continue the game’s operation themselves.
So far, no bills have been set out to change the precedent, but there is hope that one will be put forward in the future after a petition for one reached 1.4 million supporters in Europe.
