'Stop Killing Games': Gamers fight back against publishers' rights to shut down purchased games

A growing consumer rights campaign is challenging the video game industry's ability to disable games after they have been sold, arguing that players should not lose access to products they have already paid for.

The movement, known as "Stop Killing Games", was launched in 2024 by American YouTuber Ross Scott following Ubisoft's decision to shut down its online-only racing game The Crew, reports the BBC.

Since then, the campaign has gained international attention, collecting nearly 1.3 million signatures on a petition submitted to the European Commission.

The petition triggered a public hearing at the European Parliament in April, and the European Commission is expected to respond by 27 July.

At the centre of the debate is a question that has become increasingly relevant in the digital age: when consumers buy a game, do they truly own it?

The issue gained momentum after Ubisoft announced it would take The Crew offline in 2024, citing upcoming server infrastructure and licensing constraints. The game, which attracted more than 12 million players during its lifetime, became completely unplayable after the shutdown.

For many players, the decision represented more than the loss of a game.

A player known online as Chemicalflood told the BBC that he had been playing The Crew for nearly a decade.

Having started around the age of 18, he said the game had helped him through difficult periods in life and later became something he enjoyed with his children, who explored its virtual recreation of the United States.

According to him, the issue was not that Ubisoft ended support for the game, but that players lost access to it altogether.

The shutdown also caught the attention of Scott, known online as Accursed Farms, who had already been discussing issues related to digital ownership and game preservation.

"I just hate seeing creative works effectively destroyed," Scott told the BBC.

He launched Stop Killing Games to campaign against situations where every copy of a game sold becomes unusable once a publisher decides to discontinue support.

Another supporter of the campaign, a gamer known as Whammy4, who founded the fan community The Crew Unlimited and participated in efforts to preserve the game after its shutdown, compared the situation to having personal property taken away after purchase.

He argued that consumers buy a game, install it, play it for years and then discover that publishers can disable all copies worldwide without offering refunds or meaningful alternatives.

The controversy has since extended beyond gaming communities into courts and legislatures.

Ubisoft has already defended its position in legal proceedings. Responding to a proposed class-action lawsuit filed in California by two The Crew players, the company argued that customers had purchased a licence to use the game rather than unlimited ownership rights.

The publisher also maintained that players had been informed that online services would not be available indefinitely.

The lawsuit was dismissed without prejudice in June 2025 after the plaintiffs voluntarily withdrew the case.

The broader gaming industry has also pushed back against the campaign's demands.

Video Games Europe, which represents many of the industry's largest publishers, said companies must retain the option to shut down online services when games are no longer commercially viable.

The organisation also warned that some proposals promoted by campaigners could significantly increase development costs for online-only games.

Scott, however, rejected the idea that the campaign is seeking to force companies to keep servers running forever.

Instead, he said publishers should adopt responsible end-of-life plans. Such measures could include releasing updates that allow games to function offline or providing software tools that enable players to continue running games after official support ends.

The issue has become more prominent as live-service games have grown across the industry.

Unlike traditional games that can continue functioning independently, many modern titles rely on online servers and constant support from publishers.

Recent examples include Sony's decision to discontinue support for the multiplayer game Destruction AllStars.

Another high-profile case involved Concord, Sony's live-service shooter, which was taken offline less than two weeks after its launch in 2024 after failing to attract enough players. Customers received full refunds following the shutdown.

Joost van Dreunen, a professor of games business at NYU Stern, told the BBC that many modern games operate more like digital communities than conventional entertainment products.

He said games built around online interaction depend heavily on active communities, but sustaining those communities has become increasingly difficult in a market dominated by long-running successes such as Fortnite and Call of Duty.

As audiences decline, publishers often choose to shut down servers and redirect resources elsewhere.

The Stop Killing Games campaign is now pursuing change through several channels.

In France, consumer organisation UFC-Que Choisir launched legal action against Ubisoft in March over the shutdown of The Crew.

The group argues that players were misled about the permanence of their purchase and that certain contract terms were unfair. The case remains ongoing.

Ubisoft declined to comment on the litigation when approached by the BBC.

In the United Kingdom, a petition supporting the campaign secured a parliamentary debate after gathering more than 100,000 signatures.

However, the government said it had no plans to amend consumer protection laws.

British authorities stated that companies selling games must comply with existing consumer laws and that the issue would continue to be monitored.

Meanwhile, campaign supporters in the United States have backed California's proposed Protect Our Games Act. The legislation would require publishers either to ensure games remain playable after online support ends or provide refunds to customers.

The bill has already passed the California State Assembly and is currently being considered by the State Senate.

For Scott and other campaign organisers, including Moritz Katzner, the effort is likely to continue for months or even years.

Yet regardless of the outcome, the campaign has already brought renewed attention to questions surrounding digital ownership, consumer rights and the future preservation of online games, turning what began as an online protest into a debate now reaching courts and lawmakers across multiple countries.