The youtuber behind this never put a single third party ad like advertising mobile games in his youtube videos, although he did buy some online only games like Darkspore, The Secret World, and Steep before, but he did warn that the game "has always online DRM and depends on a central server so it's going to be completely unplayable one day after the servers shutdown" in his videos and has been warning us about dead DRMed games for a decade since his Battleforge video.

Also... i find it annoying that when things like this happen, people always say "Buy physical" and digital is killing games when we can already buy 3 physical editions of The Crew on all 4 platforms it released on for 10 years and all of these physical discs won't work as all of them are tied to always online DRM servers that are already shutdown, so these online only physical copies are more doomed than 99% of the digital only games released.

It's sad nobody talks about LAN and self hosted private servers for preserving online games, and rarely people talk about DRM free and GOG when it comes to game preservation.

This "petition" is a joke since it is advocating for DRM and also since it says it is not advocating for video game ownership.

No DRM-free advocate should ever support it.

At least in this thread, it seems that no one suggested that ;)

Sadly physical CD/DVD have been plagued by DRM since the early days of Steam, so they are not a good way to avoid kill-switches.

Yes, it's sad to see all the people blaming 'digital media' for lack of ownership rights/preservation. Digital vs physical is a total red herring. An executable file is an executable file - the method of delivery is irrelevant. It is just as easy to include DRM in a 'physical' game as it is a digital one.

I find the level of ignorance and wrong-headedness in the gaming community at large to be quite staggering. I can see it now: the rise of the 'physical media' equivalent of Steam. Some large corpo moving in to take advantage of the nostalgic pining for physical media, but with exactly the same DRM/client lock-in ...

" Brühühü . I'm sad because they started this pointless petition instead of the most important one ( add achievements to every pc game ) "

People bought into these games, knowing full well their lifespan was limited. When "the end" finally arrives, you don't get to go back on a deal, the conditions of which you agreed to 10 or more years ago because you suddenly realize "Hey, this actually affects me. Thought it'd never happen. MUH RIGHTS!!!". That's just not how it works.

Companies are exploiting gullible people who support or don't care about this practice until they are actually affected. Nothing illegal about that. This is not for the EU and some bombastic new law to change. The customer is fully to blame in this case, not the other party. Until the customer mentality changes and people stop supporting said practice, we will remain in the state the industry is in right now.

The best that can be done is try and educate those around you about it. Only for them to wave you away, call you paranoid and proceed to buy the thing anyway.

I'm quite happy to see games like The Crew being tossed onto the pyre of DRM awareness. It seems clear that a large portion of the gaming community aren't going to change their purchasing habits unless they personally feel pain over it (as so often seems to be human nature).

Therefore, as far as I'm concerned: let the pain begin (and the sooner the better)!

While I agree with this sentiment, I unfortunately think more pain is necessary to really wake up the general audience or pain to a larger number of people (not just gamers).

Something more akin to Fortnite shutting down and all skins/money spent are lost or Steam shutting down and gamers losing access to their entire libraries. Unfortunately, the majority of gamers still seem to be under the impression that they own their games on digital platforms like Steam or that Steam is an entity that will never go under (because its the largest PC gaming platform) so DRM is ok in these instances.

I do think PC gaming will be in for a reckoning once Gabe fully retires and Steam is passed to someone less scrupulous and looking for a quick buck (either steam is sold to someone like Microsoft or EA or the new boss at Valve decides to focus more on profits once there is a transfer of leadership). While there are cries of "if purchase isnt ownership then piracy isnt stealing" which is honestly a stupid argument and honestly larger games closing down with relatively little fanfare (mostly mobile games where players likely spend more money than they ever did on something like the Crew), I dont see this movement really gaining steam (pun unintended) until it starts to affect general digital media consumption in general like movies or software purchases. Politicians arnt exactly fans of gamers to be honest with video games still being seen as the root of tragic events like school shootings.

simply put, it is a question.

The OP explaines everything quite well in the ... op

If you're from EU, take a look and consider supporting this initiative:
This initiative calls to require publishers that sell or license videogames to consumers in the European Union (or related features and assets sold for videogames they operate) to leave said videogames in a functional (playable) state.

Specifically, the initiative seeks to prevent the remote disabling of videogames by the publishers, before providing reasonable means to continue functioning of said videogames without the involvement from the side of the publisher.

here's the link

https://www.gog.com/forum/general/stop_destroying_videogames_eu_citizens_initiative/post1

If you like games and want a more standardized approach to game design you might want to support this initiative

To me this initiative is still as silly as an initiative to "force" streaming services (like Netflix) to somehow let people watch the movies and TV-series that they plan to remove from their streaming services. Should Netflix allow users to host those movies and TV-series, or what?

If you don't like such practices, vote with your wallet.

Most won't. And it shouldn't fall on users anyway. Way, way, WAY more regulation is needed. Just that this particular initiative is just plain wrong because of that one phrase.

Unless the "end date" was written on the box, then the publishers are the ones who are robbing their customers.

If they want to get away with destroying games, then the end date must be placed on the box and / or the game must be subscription-based with no initial fee (box price). Then they could argue that it's a service and not a product.

Publishers have gotten real comfy blurring the lines between products and services and using whichever definition whenever it's suitable for them. EU must put an end to this.

============================================

Netflix is a rental service that clearly markets itself as a rental service and charges a monthly fee like a rental service. There is no item that we have to buy. We cannot buy any movie or an episode individually. This is an almost-intentionally bad comparison and that is why it sounds silly to you.

Compare it to video services that actually operate the same way as digital game stores. Take Google Movies & TV or PlayStation movie library.

They SELL videos as products. We pay a one-time fee for each video. That is a purchase and that must be treated like a purchase. If they lose the license, that should only affect new sales and not existing owner libraries. Most game stores do not yank games from user libraries once delisted, so why should Video stores be allowed to do that? If they do not want to stream that content, then they should allow users to download the actual video files. Streaming is a problem that they themselves created and forced upon us.

If you sell a product, you do not get to take it away. If you cite technical difficulties, then change the technology you use. DRM is used for greed and paranoia. There is no legitimate reason for using it. Pirates will pirate anyway, Trying to combat that is laughable and it hurts paying customers.

Same with games. Did your car and / or music license expire? That's YOUR (Publisher) problem! That is no MY (Consumer) problem! How DARE YOU, pass this problem onto me and rob me!? It was not a problem before. I can still play Need For Speed Underground years after it stopped being sold. Licensing is just an excuse. The real problem is always-online DRM. Make the campaign work offline.

Piracy is not theft. Piracy is copyright infringement. The only ones engaging in actual theft (depriving people of legally-purchased products) are the publishers of needlessly-online-bound games. How ironic.
(I would like to think that this is obvious, but since I know the internet I will state the obvious regardless: Copyright infringement is illegal and I do not promote it).

============================================

What's the alternative? I don't see anyone else lifting a finger.

Whatever phrase that you dislike is irrelevant. This is an initial proposal that will change dozens of time before (if) it becomes law.

Genuinely ask yourself if NOT supporting a game preservation movement is worth it, because you dislike the initial draft of the proposal.

If you do not support it and you do not provide an alternative, then through your inaction, you become a member of the opposition. That's just playing right into the greedy publisher's hand.

I can agree with that and it's really the only realistic thing that could happen as the outcome of this. The same way we have age ratings on a box/store description, there will be a special symbol or mark there to definitely denote it as a GaaS.

If that's all that we can achieve, then it'll still be some minor positive outcome. We must aim high to have any kind of bargaining power. If we aim below the minimum, we may as well not bother at all.