The European Parliament debate over Stop Killing Games was supposed to focus on whether publishers should be allowed to permanently shut down games people have already paid for. Slovak MEP Milan Uhrík, however, took the discussion in a very different direction, claiming that video games are being destroyed not only by aggressive monetization, but also by “wokeness,” with Assassin’s Creed Shadows and its Black samurai Yasuke becoming his chosen example.
Stop Killing Games reached another important stage in the European Parliament, where representatives discussed what should be done about digital games that effectively disappear from players’ hands once official servers are shut down. The initiative has taken a strange path over the past two years: what began as a movement driven by angry YouTube videos and consumer frustration has now become a campaign capable of presenting detailed and compelling arguments to European decision-makers.
Most of the debate unfolded more or less as expected. The majority of speakers acknowledged that video games are both mass media and works of art, with meaningful and lasting cultural impact. Several expressed support, or at least sympathy, for the goals of the Stop Killing Games movement, namely the idea that players should not completely lose access to digital experiences they previously paid for.
Some voices were more cautious. Polish MEP Piotr Müller, for example, said he supported the initiative, but warned against over-regulating the market. He argued that Europe’s games industry still needs room to develop, and that regulation should not place such a burden on the sector that it prevents growth. Others returned to the familiar argument that players do not truly own their digital games, while concerns about the influence of games on impressionable children also made an appearance.
The “Wokeness” Argument Entered The Debate
Public debates about video games, however, rarely avoid being pulled into culture-war territory. This time, that role was taken by Milan Uhrík, a Slovak MEP and leader of the far-right Republic Movement. Taking the podium, Uhrík declared: “Wokeness and aggressive monetization is destroying videogames!”
He then made his point even more directly. “You wanted to talk about what’s destroying videogames here in the European Parliament. Alright, I will say it out. One thing that is definitely destroying videogames is the crazy, woke ideology and political correctness which is being forced into the games”, Uhrík said.
The MEP then turned to the controversy surrounding Assassin’s Creed Shadows, specifically Yasuke, the game’s Black samurai. “For example, if we want to play as a samurai, obviously we want to play as a Japanese warrior and not to be forced to play as a Black person warrior or female warrior as it happened recently in Assassin’s Creed. Or to play as a queer character, without any other choice. This is an issue, really, for players”, he argued.
Stop Killing Games Is About A Much More Specific Problem
Uhrík’s intervention stood out because the original goal of Stop Killing Games is not about character choice, political representation, or the culture-war dispute around Assassin’s Creed Shadows. The central question of the initiative is much more concrete: should a publisher be allowed to make an online-dependent game completely unusable by shutting down its servers, even after players have paid for it?
Supporters of the movement are not demanding that developers keep servers running forever. The goal is instead to ensure that some usable solution exists at the end of a game’s life cycle: an offline mode, support for community servers, or some technical option that prevents a purchased product from becoming worthless. This is especially important for titles where an online connection is not just a convenience, but a basic requirement for the game to function.
That is why several representatives approached the issue more as a matter of consumer rights and cultural preservation. Video games are no longer merely disposable entertainment products, but in many cases cultural works with long-term value. If they can exist only through publisher-controlled servers, a business decision can instantly make inaccessible games that still have an audience, historical relevance or community value.
The Debate Showed How Easily The Main Issue Can Be Derailed
Even so, the European Parliament appearance of Stop Killing Games remains an important development. The fact that the initiative reached this level at all shows that digital ownership, game preservation and server shutdowns are no longer just recurring complaints on forums and social media. The topic has entered the space of political decision-making, where it is being examined from consumer, cultural and industry perspectives.
Uhrík’s speech also showed how easily this kind of debate can be derailed when identity-politics slogans replace the actual issue. The concrete problem for players here is what a digital purchase is worth if access depends on a server connection and a publisher’s decision. By comparison, the Yasuke outburst looked more like political performance than a meaningful contribution to the question of game preservation.
For Stop Killing Games, however, the debate may still point in a favorable direction. The initiative’s supporters have succeeded in pushing video games into the discussion not only as business products, but also as digital culture that may deserve long-term preservation. Whether that turns into actual regulatory change remains uncertain, but one thing is clear: the debate over shutting games down will not simply disappear because someone would rather talk about Yasuke and “wokeness.”
Source: PC Gamer
