>>713544576
To my knowledge, Stop Killing Games has provisions for the following, but Diablo 3 is a good example of why making it supportable offline would be difficult/untenable. Early days people had dumped out the client and gotten it to run without an internet connection, but a TON of the game's logic is actually run server side - spawning monsters, spawning loot, quests, world state, a huge portion of the game was completely non-functional because there was only an extremely rudimentary server emulator at the time.
Now, the problem of 'just release the server software' is that pieces that run the game, to be made as efficient and resilient as possible are probably split across a shitload of servers. A client probably only talks to one public endpoint, but that endpoint is often communicating on their internal domain to dozens of different backend services that are maybe running on purpose-made VMs, or with current games on containers that live in a generic cluster. Additionally, these services are often not game-specific, or use custom-made protocols that their other games utilize. So releasing those services for public use would compromise the architecture of other, still running games.
Then there's the storage architecture and what data about your account/characters are stored where, and the perf requirements of each type of storage - some stuff might be in redis, others maybe in a SQL database backed by spinners, backups scheduled for tape - none of this translates into a handy little exe the public could consume to run the game offline. It could be done, WoW private servers over the course of decades have apparently done quite well at replicating stuff like this, but it's a tall order in some cases, and mandating it through law is more akin to saying 'You should not make games this way anymore'
