A petition to preserve video game access recently achieved an important milestone of one million signatures, but it has two more challenges to overcome before reaching the final level. The “Stop Killing Games” movement reached a million votes earlier this month, meaning the European Union will have to consider adopting legislation addressing this issue. However, the petition first has to deal with the threat of potentially fake signatures and the resistance from major game studios and publishers.
The Stop Killing Games initiative, created by Ross Scott, aims to pass new laws to ensure that video games still run even when developer support ends. The petition was a direct response to when Ubisoft delisted The Crew from online stores, shut down the game’s servers in 2024, and revoked licenses from players who bought the game. Scott and other critics felt Ubisoft’s actions set a dangerous precedent for gamers who may lose access to their purchased games at a developer’s whim.
Even though there are enough signatures to move to the next step, Scott explained in a YouTube video that many of these may have been incorrectly filled out, while others could have been falsely submitted. The movement’s founder said, “This is not a change.org petition, this is a government process,” adding that “spoofing signatures on it is a crime.” To ensure enough legitimate signatures are collected, Scott said that there needs to be at least 10 percent more to cover the potentially invalid ones. As of July 6, the petition has earned more than 1.2 million signatures.
Beyond the signatures, a European advocacy group that includes major gaming studios and publishers like Electronic Arts, Microsoft and Nintendo released a statement opposing the movement.
“Private servers are not always a viable alternative option for players as the protections we put in place to secure players’ data, remove illegal content, and combat unsafe community content would not exist and would leave rights holders liable,” the statement read. “In addition, many titles are designed from the ground-up to be online-only; in effect, these proposals would curtail developer choice by making these video games prohibitively expensive to create.”
In a longer report, the Video Games Europe group said that this initiative would “raise the costs and risks of developing such games,” create a “chilling effect on game design” and “act as a disincentive to making such games available in Europe.”