[harha]

(Not a lawyer) You could probably sue in some jurisdictions, since a main aspect of the contract was not clearly advertised.

If it has a buy button for game xyz you should assume you’re buying the game, not a license, even if the fine print says otherwise. For multiplayer games it would probably be ok to not perpetually run the servers, for single player the server isn’t an aspect that is crucial to the functioning. There may be an issue with how long ago the purchase was though.

[Spivak]

These kinds of arguments don't make any sense to me. You can't buy copyrighted works[1], only licenses to them. So Steam changes the button to "Buy License" and literally nothing changes. Are you happy now? Of course not. Because that's not the issue. The thing you have issue with is the terms of the license, not the license itself.

[1] Okay fine you can but nobody who buys Skyrim thinks they are buying the rights to the whole Skyrim media property. But hey, I hope I'm wrong and you all owe me lots of royalties.

[harha]

You buy a copy of the game that is expected to run with the hardware defined - no end date.

If they’d change the button and add an explanation that the license can be revoked at any time without notice or reason, then my argument would be invalid, but users might not be willing to pay as much any more.

Edit: because they now openly know the significant terms and know they’re potentially being screwed. It’s already bad enough to pay full price without the ability to resell or pass on (not sure how games are right now, but that’s why I don’t use a kindle, along with it being tied to my other Amazon account and everything that goes with it)