When an online game players paid for gets turned off, should players get anything back? Some regional governments are starting to ask that question.
Players have seen paid games shut down or disappear before, Anthem and The Crew counted among them, but now the problem has moved beyond community backlash. It has become a formal topic in the United Kingdom’s Parliament, where lawmakers discussed whether current laws protect players when online-only games are shut down or removed from sale.
During a Westminster Hall debate on 3 November, Concord was raised as one of the most recent examples. Sony shut the online-only title down just over a year ago and issued refunds two weeks after launch, leaving it unplayable. The debate examined whether consumers should be better protected when games depend on servers that may close shortly after release.
The discussion was triggered by e-petition 702074, which called for restrictions on publishers disabling games that consumers have already purchased. Ahead of the session, the House of Commons Library published an official research briefing on 20 October 2025 titled “e-petition relating to consumer law and videogames.”
Why Concord was mentioned
Concord was raised as a recent case of a paid, online-only game that became unplayable shortly after launch. One lawmaker described it as “a recent example… released for PlayStation 5 and Windows in August 2024,” noting that Sony “made a commercial decision to shut it down” after a disappointing launch. They acknowledged that refunds were issued two weeks after release, but stressed that “this isn’t always the case” for similar titles.
The MP argued that players should be told how long a live-service title is expected to remain active. They said publishers should be held accountable “where [they] fail to make the life span of a game clear at the point of sale.” The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 was highlighted as legislation requiring “clear, timely, and accurate information… including the longevity and functionality of digital products.”
Concerns raised about game preservation and online closures
MP Ben Goldsborough, who led the debate, said the issue goes beyond purchase price. He told the chamber that “gamers still feel the deep sense of personal possession, because they invest time, effort, imagination, and friendship,” and that when a game shuts down without notice, “that investment is lost.” Goldsborough also pointed to the cultural importance of games made in the UK, calling the debate one “about fairness, responsibility, creativity, and protecting a cultural legacy… of which the United Kingdom should be proud.”
The briefing referenced titles like Anthem and The Crew, both paid games that were later rendered unplayable once servers went offline. The removal of The Crew previously led to the Stop Killing Games People’s Initiative in the European Union, along with legal disputes from affected players.
While no proposals were announced during the session, the debate placed online-only shutdowns within the scope of national consumer law and echoed a wider international question: what happens to digital purchases when a game becomes unplayable after its servers close?
