Stop Killing Games is a consumer movement led by creator Ross Scott that pushes for basic continuity when publishers end support for games. It argues that players who paid for a title should retain a workable way to play, which makes it a frontline issue for video game preservation and gamer consumer rights. In 2025, the campaign surged, the press took note, and regulators formally engaged. This article is current as of August–September 2025 and focuses on verified, on-record updates.
The movement’s aims and current calls to action are summarized at the Official Stop Killing Games site: Official Stop Killing Games site.
Brief History and Campaign Goals
The push began in 2024, after online-by-design titles and single-player games with always-online checks became unplayable on shutdown. The campaign’s core demands have stayed consistent: practical offline modes where feasible, clear service timelines and server-status notices, end-of-life plans baked into development, and options like sanctioned private servers when official support ends. These points are laid out in the campaign’s primary materials: Campaign manifesto.
Timeline up to Summer 2025
- Launch and first wave of attention: Ross Scott spotlighted shutdowns like Ubisoft’s The Crew, which became a symbol of the problem when access fully ended on March 31, 2024, with licenses revoked soon thereafter. Early analysis and advocacy framed the stakes for consumers. See context in the initiative overview and Ross Scott’s project hub: Ross Scott post.
- Media and public traction: By mid‑2025, established outlets began covering signature milestones and policy angles as the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) neared key thresholds.
- Regulator acknowledgments: UK authorities issued formal statements on digital obsolescence, and EU channels began engaging with the ECI process. The UK’s consumer law stance was flagged by multiple outlets and captured in coverage over the summer. A focal industry response also emerged from a pan‑EU trade group: CMA position (regulator hub; overarching guidance reference).
What’s New in August–September 2025
During these months, several concrete updates moved the story forward.
- EU hearing prospects improved: National checks reportedly showed a very high signature validation rate for the ECI, which substantially increased the likelihood of a European Commission hearing. A widely cited update summarized the 97 percent rate and the expected next steps in Brussels: European Commission response.
- Industry policy context remained in flux: Ubisoft maintained formal decommissioning guidance that catalogs affected titles and clarifies what features go dark. Notably, the company has continued to publish decommission schedules and updates in 2025, including contact points and per‑title impacts: Ubisoft policy update.
- Preservation and advocacy groups kept the spotlight on access: In parallel, legal and preservation nonprofits reiterated the stakes around shutting down games that remain for sale or which have unfulfilled consumer expectations. An accessible legal explainer that advocacy groups often reference is provided here: EFF post.
Consequently, late‑summer discourse narrowed on a few precise questions: When do consumer protection rules apply to marketed features, which shutdown notices are sufficient, and how do publishers document continuity options?
Legal Framework and Notable Precedents
- EU consumer law: The Digital Content Directive (and broader EU consumer acquis) sets expectations on conformity with contract and remedies when a digital service does not perform as advertised. These texts now sit behind many policymakers’ 2025 questions on online‑dependent games: Digital Content Directive.
- US exemptions: The Library of Congress grants triennial DMCA 1201 exemptions that shape preservation activities, including allowances for libraries, archives, and museums to maintain access to abandoned servers in some cases: DMCA 1201 exemptions.
- UK consumer law: UK guidance continues to emphasize accurate representation of features and fair notice on changes that affect use. The CMA’s consumer hub outlines the standards that increasingly inform games deactivation scrutiny: CMA position.
Publisher and Platform Reactions
Publishers and platforms have moved unevenly, but several policies and update pages remain central to how shutdowns are communicated.
- Ubisoft’s decommissioning policy: The company runs a living list of games and features scheduled for shutdown, with help articles explaining specific impacts per title. The practice remains a bellwether for disclosure norms: Ubisoft decommissioning policy.
- EA’s online services list: EA maintains a public page of titles whose online features will sunset or have ended, which has become a standard reference point for live‑service timelines in 2024–2025: EA online services list.
- Platform notices: First‑party hubs for PlayStation, Nintendo, and Xbox document online feature removals and end‑of‑service notices, which publishers increasingly link from their own pages. See a central PlayStation resource example: PlayStation announcement.
Meanwhile, trade association statements sharpened arguments around cost, liability, and moderation on private servers, which campaigners dispute as overbroad. The most direct 2025 position statement remains: CMA position (regulator hub reference for consumer protection context).
Community Response and Game Preservation
Preservation advocates pressed for workable paths to keep purchased games playable. They highlighted the cultural loss when server switches erase titles and the feasibility of planning end‑of‑life modes during development.
- Video Game History Foundation outlined data on how delistings and online‑only design threaten the historical record, while urging policy reforms and publisher cooperation: Video Game History Foundation report.
- Industry community groups likewise emphasized that transparent timelines and documented fallback modes reduce legal risk and confusion at shutdown. A clear legal explainer remains the best synthesis of preservation stakes: EFF post.
In August–September, several open letters circulated in developer and preservation communities. These letters reiterated requests for either sanctioned server emulation or offline patches when online verification is the only barrier.
2025 Case Studies That Shaped the Debate
- The Crew (2014) shutdown: Decommissioning rendered the entire game inaccessible, including solo play, which galvanized public attention and legal commentary on what was represented at purchase: The Verge analysis.
- Follow‑on policy pressure: Newsrooms tracked signature surges and policy inflection points, mapping how a single high‑profile loss drove petitions and regulatory scrutiny: Eurogamer report.
Dates, availability, and remedies varied by title. However, the through‑line was clear: when solo content fails due to server checks, public backlash intensifies, and policymakers take notice.
What Stop Killing Games Is Demanding Now
As of August–September 2025, the campaign is asking for clear, implementable end‑of‑life standards. That includes a practical offline mode where feasible, the option for sanctioned private servers if online play defines the product, meaningful shutdown notice and storefront clarity, and an end to license revocations that negate paid access.
What It Means for Players and the Industry
Practically, players should expect more service calendars, clearer sunset timelines, and better labeling on always‑online requirements. However, contractual terms and regional laws still determine remedies. Consequently, publishers are revisiting communication templates and exploring preplanned end‑of‑life modes. An authoritative explainer that frames these consumer‑law and preservation overlaps is here: Analytical overview.
Outlook and Next Steps
- EU: On the basis of validation figures, organizers and outlets expect an ECI hearing phase, with Commission services outlining next procedural steps after national checks conclude.
- Publishers: Decommission schedules will continue, but 2025 policy updates suggest more standardized notice and impact breakdowns. Ubisoft’s living help articles are a primary reference for how shutdown.
- Campaign: Organizers plan to engage with policymakers during consultations and hearings, continuing to press for on‑record commitments that keep purchased games playable in realistic ways.
Finally, Stop Killing Games shifted the debate from abstract preservation ideals to consumer‑law questions that regulators are now answering in public. That is why the next few months matter; the movement’s central principle remains straightforward: do not sell games in ways that let them be switched off entirely later.
