Patreon Logo Support us on Patreon to keep GamingOnLinux alive. This ensures all of our main content remains free for everyone. Just good, fresh content! Alternatively, you can donate through PayPal Logo PayPal. You can also buy games using our partner links for GOG and Humble Store.
We use affiliate links to earn us some pennies. Learn more.

Video Games Europe release a statement on Stop Killing Games

By -
Last updated: 7 Jul 2025 at 11:16 am UTC

Video Games Europe, a trade association that represents a bunch of major game publishers, have issued a statement pushing back against Stop Killing Games. We just recently had the news that Stop Killing Games has been seeing a huge surge, so a lot more are taking notice of it.

VGE represents the likes of Activision Blizzard King, Bandai Namco, Epic Games, ESL FACEIT Group, Netflix, Nintendo, SEGA, Roblox, Ubisoft, Riot Games and many others.

Here's their full statement:

We appreciate the passion of our community; however, the decision to discontinue online services is multi-faceted, never taken lightly and must be an option for companies when an online experience is no longer commercially viable. We understand that it can be disappointing for players but, when it does happen, the industry ensures that players are given fair notice of the prospective changes in compliance with local consumer protection laws.

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. 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.

We welcome the opportunity to discuss our position with policy makers and those who have led the European Citizens Initiative in the coming months.


It's perhaps no surprise they're not in favour of it. It is their job to serve the interests of game publishers and other companies they're involved with.

The thing is, from a consumer point of view you are paying for something that can just be taken away whenever a publisher moves on from it. Stop Killing Games is not asking for publishers to infinitely support games, as shutting off their own direct support is not something that's trying to be stopped. But simply giving players an option to continue it themselves is the main argument.

Complicated though, since every store (yes, including GOG) are just giving you a license. You don't own the games you buy.

When it comes to private servers, I can somewhat understand what they're saying. They can be a minefield of legal issues, and with all the new regulations coming in from various countries like the UK's Online Safety Act, running a private server is getting a lot more complicated too. Because yes, games that have chat and interactions are in scope of it and regulations from other countries too.

This comes in around the same time as EA announcing that Anthem is going to be shutting down, with players no longer able to jump in from January 12 2026.

Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Tags: Misc
10 Likes
About the author -
author picture
I am the owner of GamingOnLinux. After discovering Linux back in the days of Mandrake in 2003, I constantly checked on the progress of Linux until Ubuntu appeared on the scene and it helped me to really love it. You can reach me easily by emailing GamingOnLinux directly. You can also follow my personal adventures on Bluesky.
See more from me
All posts need to follow our rules. For users logged in: please hit the Report Flag icon on any post that breaks the rules or contains illegal / harmful content. Guest readers can email us for any issues.
14 comments Subscribe

doragasu 5 hours ago
User Avatar
I have signed the petition. And I can understand some of the issues. For games with simple matchmaking (e.g. fighting games) it shouldn't be that difficult for them to provide alternatives. But for things like persistent MMORPGs... looks extremely complicated.
Corben 5 hours ago
User Avatar
This was an expected answer. Yet, I'm sure there is a way to implement a system that allows for private servers. And if it's LAN only. Via VPN we can have LAN only games also being played over the internet and yet it's not public. Sure there are games that are depending on big amount of players, like MMOs. But even here we've seen private servers (looking at e.g. WoW). So it is possible. I totally understand that servers are being shut down if the game is not viable for the developer/publisher anymore. Will it still be the same kind of fun when there are no players on servers that are build and designed for lots of players? Probably not. Does it mean this game should then be trashed? Imho not.

I still see a chance for a service/plugin/software that devs can use to implement multiplayer, gives them full control as long as they monetize their game, and then hand over control to the community or a community driven service.
hardpenguin 5 hours ago
User Avatar
  • Supporter
What they said is nothing new. This is precisely why we sign the petition in the first place. We want the publishers to PUT EFFORT into ensuring games are not being disabled forever. Yes, this generates extra cost. I am sure they can manage if they funnel more money in the direction of game developers and less towards shareholders.
such 5 hours ago
Private servers exist for MMOs for which no source code has been released to the public. What this tells me is that there absolutely is a way to do this in a reasonable fashion. And yes, it will require a degree of effort on the part of the publishers and developers - that's the point. Put some effort into not killing those games once you're done with them, please. Thank you.


Last edited by such on 7 Jul 2025 at 9:30 am UTC
Omega 5 hours ago
User Avatar
The answer more or less contained what many of us expected it to.

First they start off with trying to distract from what is actually being asked, they talk about indefinite online functionality, which is not what Stop Killing Games is asking for, they merely ask for the games to remain functional within reason and not be completely bricked. A developer or publisher can opt to release the server software, alternatively they can also add an off-line mode, if neither is possible they can release documentation on how the server software works to assist in reverse engineering, may solutions are possible, no specific solution is demanded. Whatever keeps the core game content accessible or leaves behind the game in a fixable state is reasonable.

Then in the 2nd paragraph they just proceed to argue against it on the grounds of content moderation and data security. Content moderation and data security on a community server is not their concern, it is up to the community to self regulate. Frankly, the average community server will not do anything shady with my data, these greedy publishers do, they'll just sell it to anyone who would like to use it for targeted marketing or to train their models on.
ScottCarammell 5 hours ago
woooow the companies who are killing games don't like the pro-consumer movement to stop killing games. who could've seen that coming.
tarmo888 4 hours ago
I didn't sign the initiative because I think they don't understand what they are asking.

I also think that people are getting the same answers to misrepresented wishes because everybody answers to the initiative, not the FAQ. And even if they would be answering to the FAQ, they would still get answers to things that are remotely possible, but still difficult.

Gamers simply don't understand the complexities of game development, they only see - publish just one last patch.
robertosf92 4 hours ago
So much corpospeak in that commentary it makes me wanna puke!
dictator6861 3 hours ago
Oh no! I logged into a private minecraft server and now my computer is on fire and my personal data is being auctioned on the dark web. Surely microsoft will stand by their statement and take legal responsibility for this tragic event, right?
Pyronick 3 hours ago
Gamers simply don't understand the complexities of game development, they only see - publish just one last patch.
Game development today is being strangled by a broken business model: selling a product as if it's a service.

In most civil codes, this kind of bait-and-switch would be illegal. You pay full price for a game, but you don't actually own it. The moment the servers go down, the game vanishes... No refunds, no rights.

What bothers me is that this petition only focuses on games. But this isn't just a gaming problem—it's a software problem. The entire SaaS (Software as a Service) model has become one of the most abusive, unregulated business practices since the days of Standard Oil or IG Farben. It strips consumers of ownership and locks everything behind recurring fees and corporate control. This is what "You will own nothing - and you will be happy" is, except nobody will be happy in the end.

This petition is a good step, but the bigger issue goes way beyond games. We need to start pushing back on the entire model.


Last edited by Pyronick on 7 Jul 2025 at 11:42 am UTC
Szkodnix 2 hours ago
User Avatar
Sure VGE, thanks for your input.

Now let's see what actual EU Comission will have to say, rather than typically corporate dogs hired to protect shadowy gaming companies interests.

Dogs can bark, but it shouldn't really change much.
kneekoo 2 hours ago
User Avatar
What's pathetic about Video Games Europe's statement is that they seemingly cannot fathom that people could run private servers with their own family and friends, instead of servers wide open to the whole world. They also seem to not even have the slightest clue about how any company can say "We're done, here's the server binary. If you want to run it, you take full responsibility, so use it wisely and have fun."

People don't expect game makers to be forever responsible for the infrastructure, they just want to be able to play the game even if that means they have to go through the hurdles of making their own servers and managing them on their own. But this probably sounds too simple for their complicated minds to get it.
Keksus 2 hours ago
I don't see the problem. The point is not that online games are still playable as before. There is no need for private servers. It's that they remain playable in some form. Like a museum. Meaning: I can still download the entire thing, create a character and wander around alone in the world - no connection to servers needed anymore. So no problem with chat or anything else. The games effectively would effectively become pure SP games.

Sure: I will not be able to do raids in an online game. I might not be able to complete dungeons alone. Or ... I could try and be utterly destroyed because I am alone. But that's another point entirely and wouldn't be something companies need to worry about.

All they need to do is: Make sure I can still run the game after they shut everything down. How well it runs will be beneath an S.E.P.-Field.


Last edited by Keksus on 7 Jul 2025 at 12:56 pm UTC
QYME 1 hour ago
We all agree that a very civilised and appropriate answer to that pushback is "yeah frack that. It's your turn to get bent, learn to enjoy it lubeless like we had to do.", right ?

Right ?
While you're here, please consider supporting GamingOnLinux on:

Reward Tiers: Patreon Logo Patreon. Plain Donations: PayPal Logo PayPal.

This ensures all of our main content remains totally free for everyone! Patreon supporters can also remove all adverts and sponsors! Supporting us helps bring good, fresh content. Without your continued support, we simply could not continue!

You can find even more ways to support us on this dedicated page any time. If you already are, thank you!
Login / Register