Stop Destroying Videogames – European Citizens' Initiative

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Scope of the Initiative (Games vs All Software/Devices)

  • Many argue the principle should extend beyond videogames to all software and even IoT/appliances: devices should perform basic functions without servers, apps, or permanent connectivity.
  • Others see the petition as a tactical “toe in the door” using games as a politically easier starting point that could set precedent for broader software rights.

Ownership, Licensing, and the Meaning of “Buy”

  • Strong theme: buyers feel they “own” games and should retain use even if servers shut down; comparing current practice to selling a self‑destructing disc.
  • Opposing view: you only ever buy a license or access to a service, especially for online games; server shutdown is part of the deal.
  • Some propose forcing honest labeling: call it “rent/subscribe” instead of “buy/purchase” when access is revocable.

Mandated Labor, Cost, and Feasibility

  • Critics say the initiative effectively mandates unpaid work: rewriting code to remove online checks, exposing server binaries/APIs, dealing with proprietary tooling and security reviews.
  • Supporters reply this is just normal regulation: like warranties, safety, or right‑to‑repair; costs should be built into pricing and architecture from day one.
  • One developer offers a detailed example where making a self‑hostable version would have taken roughly a year of work and conflicted with third‑party licenses.

Single‑Player DRM vs Online/Multiplayer Games

  • Broad support for requiring single‑player games to remain playable offline by removing phone‑home/DRM when support ends. Examples: NFS Underground, Shadow of War, The Crew, Minecraft account migration, always‑online consoles.
  • Much more contention around online‑only and MMOs (WoW, FFXIV, GW2):
    • Some say these should expose dedicated server binaries or at least server protocols when official servers close.
    • Others argue MMOs fundamentally rely on central control, shared data, and reused proprietary tech, so mandating self‑hosting is unrealistic.

Market and Regulatory Effects (Especially in the EU)

  • Some fear this will chill server‑backed or live‑service development, hit small studios hardest, and push more games to free‑to‑play or subscriptions.
  • Others welcome that: any company unwilling to comply “good riddance,” creating space for DRM‑free, preservation‑friendly alternatives.
  • There’s debate over whether EU‑style regulation historically deters innovation or successfully protects consumers.

Ambiguities and Open Questions

  • Unclear boundaries: subscription games, free‑to‑play titles, and games that are replaced by sequels/overhauls.
  • Disagreement over how widespread the “killed games” problem really is and whether the petition text sufficiently distinguishes “phoning home” DRM from inherently online games.