Fact Check: "Stop Killing Games is Bad?"
What We Know
The claim that "Stop Killing Games is bad" stems from comments made by Twitch streamer and YouTuber Thor "Pirate Software" regarding the Stop Killing Games initiative, which was launched in April 2024 after Ubisoft announced the shutdown of its game, The Crew. This game had sold over 12 million copies and was an online-only experience, leaving players unable to access it once the servers were shut down. Pirate Software criticized the initiative for being vague and targeting games that were originally marketed as single-player but transitioned to live service models, which become unplayable when servers are shut down (source-3).
In a recent response, Accursed Farms, the founder of the Stop Killing Games initiative, argued that Pirate Software's understanding of the movement was flawed and that the initiative was not intended to retroactively affect existing games but rather to influence future game development (source-3). Accursed Farms labeled some of Pirate Software's critiques as red herrings, suggesting they diverted attention from the main issues at hand (source-3).
Additionally, popular YouTuber Charlie "MoistCritical" has publicly supported the Stop Killing Games movement, indicating that there is a division of opinion within the gaming community regarding the initiative (source-3).
Analysis
The claim that "Stop Killing Games is bad" reflects a subjective interpretation of the initiative's goals and implications. Pirate Software's criticism hinges on the belief that the movement could negatively impact all live service games, suggesting that it lacks specificity and could lead to unintended consequences (source-3). However, Accursed Farms has countered this by clarifying the initiative's focus on future game development rather than retroactive changes to existing titles, which indicates a more nuanced approach than what Pirate Software suggests (source-3).
The reliability of the sources involved in this discourse varies. Accursed Farms, as the founder of the initiative, has a vested interest in defending it, which may introduce bias. Conversely, Pirate Software, while a prominent critic, also has a platform that could influence public perception. The engagement from other content creators like MoistCritical adds another layer of public opinion, but it does not necessarily provide objective analysis (source-3).
Conclusion
The verdict on the claim "Stop Killing Games is bad" is Partially True. While there are valid criticisms regarding the vagueness of the initiative and its potential implications for live service games, the initiative itself aims to address important issues surrounding game preservation and player rights. The debate reflects a broader conversation about the future of gaming and the responsibilities of developers, suggesting that while the claim has merit, it does not capture the full complexity of the situation.
