I’ll apologize for the overreach on the subject of legality. But I do think treating it as an imminent danger, like it’s locking off options, is an overreach.

We DO see more game passes currently. There’s EA+, Ubisoft+ (often bundled in other services), PlayStation Plus, Nintendo Online, and even some other niches like Indie Pass.

Right now, a variety of consumers see the ads for these, and accept or reject the offer/pricing based on their circumstances. There doesn’t appear to be a direct “danger” of these models swallowing all digital consumption. The most common outcry I’ve seen is “Don’t rent these things! When the rental period is up, you have to give it back!” To me, that just insults the intelligence of people who are agreeing to these terms knowingly, which is definitely not everyone. I will volunteer that I pay for PS+, knowing I don’t own its games.”

I similarly don’t see an advantage to the supposed “making the switch” in which a publisher announces “Our next suite of games will be rental only and disallow purchase”. That would just be poor PR for that publisher and lose them customers to competitors.

To be clear, we have NEVER seen that and the fear written out by you and others suggests it will ALWAYS be the case. You are suggesting the potential for a 100% industry shift-over. The closest thing we’ve seen is live service games, and the clear preference there is through voluntary spending like Fallout 76’s vault pass; not lockout systems that kick people out of play wholesale for missing a payment. Even acknowledging how greedy corporations are, they don’t really have a strong reason to consider such lockouts.