[rawbot]

Because most users of games don't really care for this. They are either too young, or to busy with other facets of life that they just want to play the game.

It is only a small percentage that are dedicated enough to care, either because they really enjoy the game or because they want to support game preservation.

If you make it opt-in, companies won't care to add it and they will only lose a few percentage points (I would be surprised for anything higher than 1%) of people that will be put off by the lack of "EOL support" guarantee.

[A4ET8a8uTh0]

<< Because most users of games don't really care for this.

Agreed, but surely there is money to be made on people like me, who clearly have money to drop on games without blinking too much if I am having fun without having to jump through hoops ( fwiw, DRM is a hoop for me ). As in, I was a kid once. My generation is all grown up, but we actually have money to spend on games. Is it just easier to sell to kids who don't know any better?

[JTBooth]

If you want a middleweight solution, between "ask about this on developer forums" and "try to get a law passed," you could create a consumer organization that publishes a list of games that are doing all the right things. Publish a newsletter, create free distribution for companies that don't use DRM and have sunset support plans.