This webpage was generated programmatically; to access the article in its original context, you can follow the link below:
https://www.pcgamer.com/gaming-industry/2024-was-the-year-gamers-really-started-pushing-back-on-the-erosion-of-game-ownership/
and should you wish to have this article removed from our platform, please reach out to us
Since the emergence of digital distribution (which, contrary to popular belief, existed before Steam), gamers have been concerned about their ownership of games. There was a time when this apprehension was intertwined with a nostalgic yearning for physical media, that reassuring comfort of possessing the disc and truly owning the game. However, as the physical and retail aspects have diminished, particularly on PC, our inquiries concerning various digital marketplaces and Steam’s foundational role have become increasingly critical. It appears that 2024 marks the moment when a considerable number of gamers began to earnestly address the diminishing control over the software they have invested substantial money in.
The discussions have been persistent, but they have gained prominence due to the undeniable fact that, particularly over the last ten years, a growing number of games have simply vanished. We are not referring to obscure indie projects, but rather major budget titles for which companies have invested millions and hundreds of developers have dedicated years of their careers. In 2024, we even witnessed the ideal example: Concord, Sony’s live service shooter, which unfortunatey lasted just 11 days before being abruptly shut down.
This seems unbelievable, doesn’t it? Concord was a high-profile shooter supported by PlayStation, one of the largest and wealthiest brands in gaming, and it barely lasted two weeks. To the average player, Concord might as well have never been a part of gaming history.
However, Concord is merely one notable instance among many, and the combination of widely recognized games disappearing from storefronts and the numerous titles featuring online components that will never function again has highlighted these issues for many individuals. Arguments regarding the preservation of games for future generations may appeal to the enthusiasts among us, but for the mainstream audience, it has become increasingly common to spend $60 or more on a title that may not be playable a couple of years later, or at the very least lacks the experience originally promised at release. I don’t envy those attempting to play Suicide Squad in a year’s time (albeit in this case Rocksteady has pledged to introduce an offline mode).
The primary outlet through which this escalating concern has been expressed, or at least the most visible, was the Stop Killing Games initiative. This was triggered by Ubisoft’s decision to shut down The Crew in April of this year, rendering the decade-old racing game unplayable with no offline mode forthcoming due to “server infrastructure and licensing issues”—which incensed fan and YouTuber Ross Scott enough to galvanize support around the Stop Killing Games website.
The aim is to establish a focal point for resistance against what Scott refers to as the industry’s “attack on both consumer rights and the preservation of media,” with the site’s goal being to guide consumers towards alternative gatherings such as major online petitions and provide guidance on submitting complaints to regulatory authorities like the DGCCRF, France’s consumer protection agency. The legal stance is that video games should be classified as “goods” rather than “services”—irrespective of the terminology used by publishers—and goods should not be rendered unusable by the seller after they have been purchased by consumers.
Goods should not be made inoperable by the seller after consumers purchase them.
Alright: Some of the claims seem somewhat far-fetched. A proposed class-action lawsuit alleging that players of The Crew were “misled” by Ubisoft likened the situation to the publisher invading peoples’ homes and stealing parts of a pinball machine. Yet other aspects have the potential to bring about genuine change by capturing the attention of regulators. Stop Killing Games is currently running a petition that, if it garners a million signatures by July 2025, will compel the EU to consider prohibiting the rendering of multiplayer games unplayable (it already has over 400,000 signatures).
This was also unfolding amid a broader context where both publishers and regulators were coming to realize that, at the very least, significant questions about digital ownership remain unanswered. Even if players might not appreciate the responses. Steam introduced a new disclaimer regarding ownership that wasn’t entirely novel, but seemed prompted by the surge in major publishers making games inoperable and, in some cases, revoking licenses. This message followed soon after a new Californian statute requiring retailers to inform consumers that the digital games they purchase can be revoked at any moment—precisely what this message conveys.
The point being that Valve appears to be taking the California law into account, assuming that other states will likely adopt similar measures, and addressing it in the most straightforward manner feasible: Uniformly applying the new language rather than responding in a manner specific to each state or region.
Never missing an opportunity to comment on such issues, GOG (previously Good Old Games) took a moment to remind players that, hey, anything you purchase from us is yours permanently and cannot be taken away. Furthermore, GOG has committed to a new preservation initiative this year that will ensure games like New Vegas continue to operate on modern systems indefinitely, regardless of publishers’ actions.
Oh, and the final unique GOG feature: It will now allow you to bequeath your collection to someone else: As long as you can demonstrate that you’ve truly passed away.
GOG demonstrates that this is not solely an issue of gamers against the gaming sector. In reality, numerous industry veterans and studios believe that the sector is performing dismally in this regard, and offering players a subpar experience as a result. Larian’s publishing director Michael Douse became quite agitated about Ubisoft’s actions over the year, and turned the spotlight back on the publisher, asserting that if players must acclimate to not possessing games, “developers must acclimatize to not having jobs.”
However, not all matters are so adversarial. Some publishers are significantly more aware of the significance of their back catalogs, and companies like Capcom incorporate their legacy as a crucial component of their current strategy through rereleases and remakes. There is a growing recognition across the industry of the importance of retro games and, aside from the preservation aspect, this will eventually inspire improved practices from more publishers.
Increasingly, publishers are recognizing the merit in collaborating with firms dedicated to the enhancement and maintenance of classic games. For instance, 2024 marked another outstanding year for Nightdive, a studio that specializes in revitalizing and remastering legendary titles, ranging from System Shock to Dark Forces to The Thing.
“I was engaged in remasters even prior to joining Nightdive,” states Larry Kuperman. “One of the initial ones was Total Annihilation, in which I was involved while at Stardock. We faced considerable resistance from individuals. I mean, it was perceived as an artistic endeavor, not a commercial venture, as the belief was, well, who would ever purchase these outdated games?
“They were fantastic then and remain excellent now, and corporations have started to acknowledge that, and certainly, we’ve assumed a leadership role in that. However, we are not the sole company involved in this practice nowadays. Everyone is.”
Numerous distinct issues are intermingled under the concept of ownership and preservation, and 2024 appears to be the year that many gained much greater visibility for players and regulators alike. The inquiry of whether you actually own your Steam games, for instance, can be simply resolved at this moment: No, you do not. Valve can remove them from you at any time and there is nothing you can do to prevent it.
Many of us have been aware of this for an extended period and have accepted it for the sake of convenience. However, it seems we are approaching a point where these platforms are so integral to our gaming lives, and the personal investment in them is escalating, that the broader audience is no longer satisfied with the status quo. More and more individuals are recognizing that, despite any contrary feelings, we do not own our games. And that there is no valid reason to merely accept this when alternatives are available.
This page was generated automatically; to view the article in its original format, please visit the link below:
https://www.pcgamer.com/gaming-industry/2024-was-the-year-gamers-really-started-pushing-back-on-the-erosion-of-game-ownership/
and if you wish to remove this article from our website, kindly contact us
