Meet Ross Scott. Per his own admission, he enjoys video games. He also enjoys owning things. And he,
like many of us, remembers a time when buying a video game meant you always had access to it
unless you snapped it, broke it, microwaved it, or let your friend from school borrow
it before they moved away without telling you. Mr. Scott also recalls that in those
days you could still access online features and play with others at any time because the
tools to host play sessions were in the games themselves. If you don’t remember those days,
you’re probably 10 years old. Where are your parents? Have them explain to you that if the
Fortnite servers go down then you lose everything because you don’t actually own anything and
servers have shifted to being run by companies. “That can never happen,” you say. You know,
kid…for a figment of my imagination, you lack imagination. It can always happen. Over time,
publishers have shifted game life support systems to their side of the table. All it
takes is a flip of a metaphorical switch and the lights are off without you getting a say
in the matter. That’s exactly what’s happening now with Ubisoft’s erasure of The Crew (2014),
and Mr. Scott sees this as the perfect opportunity to take real-world action with his “Stop Killing
Games” campaign. Why now? Why The Crew? Why Ubisoft?
It’s because they’re French.
You see, America is a relatively young, established nation.
Has essentially only ever been with its high
school sweetheart, Capitalism, for a majority of its existence, and has a hard time imagining
how to function without it, so the concerns of private ownership are deeply ingrained into the
country’s way of life. “Consumer rights sure sound nice, let me just check in with Capitalism first.
He said no.” Passing meaningful legislation that benefits the people is difficult because
it’s often painted as anti-capitalist thinking, therefore anti-american. Walkable cities? Think
of the oil companies! Better healthcare? Think of the insurance companies! You want the IRS to just
send you your completed tax information so all you have to do is sign if it’s correct or not?
Think of TurboTax, and how can any of this be profitable for Frito-Lay?
Admittedly, though, this gung-ho capitalist
churn mentality is what helped establish America
as a global superpower.
Alongside nations more than twice or thrice its age, so it's understandable why it wouldn’t want
to stray from the racing plans this late into the game. Just maintain max speed and keep
kicking the Consumer Rights can down the foggy information superhighway with a bright yellow
road sign marked “THE FUTURE IS NOW.” The future of consumer protections is vague and once again
relying on the rest of the world to start the conversation. That’s the tricky part. Once a
nation sets an example, sets precedent, then the others are more willing to make a move,
as was the case in 2018 when EA’s predatory monetization of Star Wars Battlefront 2 drew the
attention of different world governments, such as Belgium and the Netherlands who have maintained a
ban on games with loot boxes ever since and are a basis for comparison when other governments
consider their own loot box legislation. Gambling, buying and selling games, it’s
all covered under commerce or commercial code, another area where America lags behind. Frankly,
Frankly, I don't blame him.
I'd also stay out of the way of any nation
whose commercial laws predated my existence.
UK merchant laws so old they're written in
Latin just kinda hit different, you know?
After all, it was the Sale of Goods Act of 1979 that was repeatedly brought up when
discussing Valve's lacking quality assurance
and nonexistent consumer protections during its buyer-beware era in the 2010s. Poor quality and
false advertising wouldn’t fly with physical products, so why should there be an exception
for virtual products.
France operates in a similar fashion, but different because they use
Civil Law instead of Common Law. In plainspeak, Common Law is like me saying “do what you want,
until you hurt someone. Then I’m going to say you can’t do that, and I’m going to try and keep track
of what I said you can and can’t do.” Civil Law is like setting up a list of house rules beforehand.
Making sure their version of capitalism has to abide by preordained rules keeps it from growing
out of control. It’s not unlikely to think that they would find arbitrary expiration dates are
not much different from planned obsolescence, something they’re already investigating Apple
for. If you didn’t know, Ubisoft, being French, falls under France’s jurisdiction
That's why, France, why Ubisoft?
I ask myself the same question when I look back at what they used to be.
Why Ubisoft?
why? More to the point, this year they planned to shutter The Crew’s online servers,
but the game can only be played online, effectively making the game inaccessible
to anyone who purchased one of over 2 million copies that have been sold since its release,
digital or physical. Ubisoft is acting out the long awaited “what if?” What if a company wanted
to just take away your game after you purchased it? Some would say well they can do so because
you don’t actually own any video games. You are essentially agreeing to the terms of renting
a license that can be revoked at any time. That doesn’t fly so well outside of America
where video games are seen as goods. I’ve covered a lot of this in my Preservation Paradox video and
Mr. Ross Scott also goes into detail as to why he believes it is all a load of bull hockey. That’s
why he Scott launched the “stopkillinggames” campaign. As he put it, Ubisoft and The Crew
are merely the weak links in the industry so that governments can examine this practice and stop
publishers from destroying games. This practice of nullifying ownership years after a purchase
is unheard of and not-yet codified, because I imagine merchants didn’t anticipate carrots on
on a string to be such a hot commodity in the 21st century.
Most don't even know the string is there.
Now is the best time to make a fuss and get an official ruling.
And I want to focus on the three main points of the Stop Killing Games campaign.
There's a lot of information to take in, but these are three major points for now.
Firstly, this is to get the attention of different governments.
We want their eyes on this thing.
We want their attention.
We want them to look and see if it's kosher.
Getting them to even have a looksie is the toughest part in many cases. And hopefully,
they rule against it. All you need is one government deciding that none of
this is smells right and it becomes easier for other governments to make their own rulings.
Secondly, if they rule against companies
shutting down games, then we want them to enforce
an end of life policy.
We don't want to force publishers into maintaining
video games against their will, we want something
that will allow a player to continue to play
the game after a company has moved on, even
if it means at a greatly diminished capacity.
having some of the game you bought is better than none of the game you bought
and thirdly whether this pulls through or not we want greater transparency if
the government says it's okay for companies to destroy their games
Then enforce better phrasing and markings that make it
obvious that what we are buying can be easily dissolved.
For example, rentals come with terms of service
that describe when you lose access to a product.
This little tiny bit in the corner is not going to cut it anymore.
Everyone made fun of that one mobile game, Love Live or whatever it was called,
for announcing their release and closure in the same tweet.
But I for one appreciate the warning.
Let me consider if I still want to buy a game
that won't be available in a year or two or ten.
And he goes into much more detail than all
of this, so I would advise watching his full
video link in the description.
I don't want to take too much focus from it, because he's put in so much hustle for
this movement.
He even made an ADHD version that's only 60 seconds, how thoughtful.
And this website StopKillingGames.com
tells you exactly what it needs out of you, and
walks you through the steps.
The point of this video is to signal boost the campaign.
The point of both of us is that we want governments to step in.
And even if all else fails, the noise from
all of this can incite change through American
capitalism as well.
You are being watched, some of you anyways.
There are entire branches in gaming
dedicated to weighing public perception and spending.
If it seems enough people want to pay for
the preservation of their games then it will
happen.
In the wake of all of this, not just this
campaign, but the talks that have been floating
around for the last few months, Xbox has
formed a new team dedicated to future-proofing its
current and old games.
As it shows, if they sense enough people
want crossplay and backwards compatibility to be
worth investing into then they will.
Your voices matter.
And Ross Scott could use your voice right now.
