ESA Opposes California Bill Requiring Notice Before Game Shutdowns

The battle over who owns an online game after the servers go dark is now in California’s Capitol. Assembly Bill 1921, the Protect our Games Act, would require publishers to give players at least 60 days’ notice before ending services and then provide an alternate playable version, a patch or update, or a refund when shutdown day arrives.

The bill was introduced by Assemblymember Chris Ward on February 12, 2026, and it targets server-connected digital games sold on or after January 1, 2027. It also would bar companies from selling, leasing, or otherwise distributing a version of a game that cannot be used without services controlled by the operator. The Assembly Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection heard the measure on April 16.

The committee analysis put the fight in stark terms: Stop Killing Games and Consumer Reports supported the bill, while the Entertainment Software Association opposed it. That split captures the core argument behind the proposal, which treats digital game sales less like permanent ownership and more like licenses that can vanish when a publisher pulls the plug.

The ESA’s objection goes straight to the business model behind live-service games. The trade group says compliance would divert limited time and resources away from new games, features, and technology, and that many projects depend on changing systems, licensed content, and online infrastructure that cannot simply be frozen in place forever. In the group’s view, forcing studios to build shutdown plans into every release would make already expensive development even harder.

For players, though, the issue is not abstract. Shutdowns have turned purchases into dead ends, with Ubisoft’s online-only racer The Crew becoming a flashpoint after its 2024 shutdown and BioWare’s Anthem also highlighting the fragility of always-online ownership. Electronic Arts shut down more than 20 games in 2025, a number that has only sharpened the sense that a purchase can disappear overnight.

That is why AB 1921 matters well beyond one state. If it becomes law, California could set a precedent for how online games are marketed, maintained, and retired, with knock-on effects for the broader industry. Even if it stalls, the ESA’s public opposition shows how much pressure publishers are under as lawmakers and players push back against the idea that buying a game can still mean losing it without warning.