Subnautica 2 just set off a chain reaction that nobody can stop

追加: 2026-05-25

[00:00:00]Subnotica 2 has released to commercial insanity, but now it seems like everybody's leaving. The community is fed up, and it comes down to a few reasons. The first is the enduser license agreement, or EULA for short, which has gotten so much attention from players. It seems to be a big reason why many people are now leaving in droves.

[00:00:16]And later on, I'll also tie this entire story up against the most recent public hearing that has been going on with SKG, or stop destroying games as they're calling it in the European Union. But first, to frame this all together, as PC Gamer says in their own article, Subnotica 2's EULA is so severe that even this new story breaks it.

[00:00:33]Unfortunately, this is true because the EULA is so wide and devious that saying or doing anything is technically not allowed with it. As PC Gamer says here, just by speaking about the game in the nature that they are in their own article, they are technically breaking Craftton's EULA as well. As they said there, you aren't allowed to criticize Craftton because it will harm the reputation of company. our affiliates, our service providers or licensers or the reputation of the game, the documentation or the services. Meaning that my video right now is also breaching that agreement too because it's just not allowed to happen according to Cfton. As PC Gamer says here, just having a VPN running on your setup is also a violation of Craftton's rules, which again seems annoyingly rigid if you want to play your C survival video game. Some of the further EULA clauses discovered include if for whatever reason you suffer damage due to Subnautica 2. Craftton is legally only allowed to pay upwards of $50 if you take any action against them. I don't even know what that means. Like what damage? Maybe if you play the game too much and you strain your eyes or something. Either way, it seems like a pointless part of the clause. But just reading through the EULA further, you also have no right to refund for Subnotica 2 under any circumstances unless you get the law involved with your refund, which that just seems egregious. Like, hello 911. I'd like to report a problem. Yeah, Craftton. Yeah, they won't refund my C survival game.

[00:02:00]Oh, they hung up. Well, that's no wonder. Also, if you break the terms of service of the EULA for any reason, this also conveniently removes your right to a refund, too, which isn't that great.

[00:02:11]So, if you get mad about Subnotica 2 for whichever reason, post your frustrations anywhere, say Twitter, Reddit, you name it, surprise, you broke the agreement and your money is theirs forever. Now, another bizarre claim in this agreement is Craft and can for any reason claim that you have caused damages to them.

[00:02:27]Not even the game, just them as a company. And by you buying or playing Subnotica 2, you also forfeit the ability to counter any of this. So, probably a good idea that I haven't bought the game myself yet at this point, I may be legally protected from a laundry list of offenses on Craftton's part. As long as I never buy the game at this point, which is kind of hilarious, actually. As soon as I hit add to card and start downloading it though, someone from Craftton is going to blow my face smooth off with like a 50 cal it looks like, which is just great. Another bizarre demand of Craftton is if they for any reason believe that you have stolen art or any other copyrighted material from them as a company, they also reserve the right to have access to not only your signature somehow, but also your real identity as well, which is again a massive breach cuz I understand Steam for example needing your legal name since your payment is obviously attached to your account. But a game sold on Steam needing access to who you are, is that not weird to anyone? Next thing you know, when Subnotica 3 happens, Craftton's going to demand a vial of your blood to be sent in the mail or your spit in a container so they can clone you if you try to run away or like a lock of your hair in case you say anything bad, they're going to send shamans after you. Like, the whole thing just comes off as ridiculous. I know that. And I've barely scratched even 1/4th of what's even on this agreement. If you decide to play Subnotica 2, Craftton also cannot confirm if your user data, that's, you know, your name, your address, all of that connected to your account will even be safe if you play Subnotica 2, which is kind of wild, dude. And oh yeah, enjoy our C survival game. Oh, your data got leaked. Well, too bad. We told you guys it's not our problem. I mean, you hit agree, so it's your fault now instead. As PC Gamer says here, the EULA also mentions that you can't use the game you bought on multiple devices, which means if you play via Steam Deck from PC, is that not also multiple devices? Is that going to be enough for people to have their license revoked entirely? As you can see, it's all rather nebulous and very stupid. But regardless of all of that, Subnotica 2 has sold like water in the middle of the desert. As Alania Analytics shows here, Subnotica 2 has sold somewhere well past 4 million units on Steam already. This graph is probably already out of date, but the point stands that the game has by and large sold crazy good numbers regardless. The game also hit half a million concurrent players on Steam.

[00:04:41]Yet, if you go check it out right now, as you can see here, Subnotica 2 has already cratered its highest player count a week after release by well over almost 75%. So, what gives then? How is one of the bestselling games of the year so far already hemorrhaging players so quickly? The answer is two things. One, the EULA is crazy rigid, and anyone who becomes aware of it likely wants nothing to do with the game because of it, and you can't really blame them. The other is, well, Subnotica 2 players really want to be able to defend themselves in the game. Cuz you see, in this game, you can't exactly fight back against the local wildlife as you can in other games. Sure, yes, you can ward off the smaller fish, but when it comes to anything in the game that can reasonably hurt you and cause you to, you know, meet your maker, it's kind of impossible to do right now in game. Currently, when you play Subnautica 2, if enemies like sharks want to eat you, they're pretty much going to eat you. All you can really do is run away and hide. And players are getting really frustrated cuz clearly, again, Steam lost 75% of its player base already. Some may say to use flares, but that's a temporary solution. Even the resonator wastes your battery life, so it's not really a good option either. Of course, people are likely going to defend the game and say that it's an early access, but just because the game is in early access does not mean it needs to not listen to the feedback. The entire point of early access is so that those who play can help guide the game and make it better through its development. This is kind of the opposite of that. A lot of people online, especially on Twitter, seem to be defending Subnotica 2, saying that it's not a combat game, but either way, the proof is in the player numbers. You can tell people to just go play something else, but all that does is miss the point and cause people to leave, which is what they're doing. Not to mention, this goes against the design philosophy of the first game, which did indeed allow you to defend yourself to some capacity, or at least more than here, I guess. As IGN reported here about it, one developer at Subnotica 2 responded to a user on Discord asking for ways to defend themselves. And this level designer flat out just said, "Go play something else." If they didn't like the design philosophy of Subnotica 2, which may have seemed like a good thing in the moment to say, but you should probably never say that.

[00:06:40]Actually, I think a lot of developers also don't realize that whenever they speak to a single fan or answer a question, they are not just answering that person's question because whatever that person asks you becomes the community's question as well. It then represents everybody. And if you respond in a condescending way like this level designer did, the impact of those words do not stop at one player. It will spill like oil and spread everywhere. So, when you say just go play Sons of the Forest instead, well, people will take your words at heart and go play anything but your game now instead. is just never a good idea is what I'm saying. IGN did confirm that internally Unknown Worlds, which makes Subnotica, is talking about the idea of adding some form of combat to the game, which that makes sense because as it stands, the game clearly takes a pacifist approach, which in today's world a lot of people are tired of to no one's surprise. One environmental artist on Subnotica named Uli, I think that's how you say it anyways, responded to some users who are fed up with the fact that Subnotica does not allow you to defend yourself. Uli said is seen here that it's a hot topic for unknown worlds and they are exploring ideas. But either way, this environment artist is personally fine with the no combat rule in Subnotica 2, but I think it's probably better to add something if many people are asking for it because if it angers people, just make it a toggle in the settings. You can either play the game in full as a pacifist if you want to, or if you want to be more active in your gameplay when it comes to a shark trying to eat you whole, you can do that, too. You pretty much gain nothing by not including this.

[00:08:03]And personally for me, I don't like playing games where I can't fight back myself. It's a big reason why I dislike horror games where you just kind of run and hide, cuz that doesn't sound realistic to me at all. It's probably why I also love Resident Evil so much, cuz that feels more legit, right? Oh, there's zombies. Well, I got bullets ready to resize their faces, so it's fine. If Resident Evil had no combat, I would never have touched that series myself at all, I got to admit. The other big issue in Subnotica 2's inventory space, the game doesn't have that much to begin with, but needing to keep flares and the like on you to protect yourself to some degree is also just a temporary solution. And of course, it takes up space as well. So, there's no good solution right now, which means yes, it does need fixing. But I think the combination of this pacifist like mentality meets draconian censorship clauses is a big reason why a lot of people are calling in quits already.

[00:08:47]Early access or not, it's still an exodus nonetheless, it doesn't mean that Subnotic Katu isn't profitable. I'm sure it made its money back already, but it's still what it is. PC Gamer had more to say about the crazy EULA like this. And you're not allowed to post spam trolling a friend during your underwater adventure. Craftton might take the game away from you. But don't worry, it looks like Craftton could do this at any time and for any reason. The whole thing just comes off as weird. Even if Craftton did try to calm the nerves, saying that they wouldn't revoke your game access if you streamed the game or made a YouTube video about it. But the very fact that these things even exist at all within this agreement is grounds enough for a lot of people to steer clear altogether.

[00:09:26]This of course all then ties directly into SKG or as they've been calling it in the European Parliament recently, Stop Destroying Games, probably because the original movement's name is a little not, you know, advertiser friendly. So I'll refer it to as such here, too. So stop destroying games recently had a plenary session in European Parliament.

[00:09:46]That's what you're seeing on screen here right now. If you don't know what a plenary session is, it's a meeting where all people who are tied to a legislative body must attend to discuss the topics at hand. So, in this case, stop destroying games was the topic that brought together all of these people. Of course, I can't go over the entire conference word by word cuz that'll take way too long, but I'll summarize what happened and how what SKG is fighting for directly ties into Subnotic Katus's weird EUA that has again caused people to run for the hills. Firstly, it's confirmed at one point that 1.3 million European people have indeed signed the SKG petition, which is why this is happening now. So, thanks to anyone who actually did that. Secondly, one of the bigger parts was that the politicians and such in attendance were demanding that a balanced approach needed to be met in order to protect their citizens on this matter. One way of this is that they wanted to refer to games as cultural goods and they wanted to protect games from the disproportionate financial or even the technical burdens that have been placed on games due to the laws that are currently in place that obviously they're fighting right now. This is a long way of saying they want to make it easier for games to exist and also thrive because they are just as important as products as really anything else. One of the core issues they also debated during this was that games are often treated as temporary services rather than as lifelong products. This ties directly into the whole you will own nothing and be happy narrative. Another point brought up is that the people in attendance here for SKG or stop destroying games, however you want to call it yourself, are vehematly against the concept of destroying a game's longevity remotely.

[00:11:21]This directly ties into Subnotica 2 since it like many other games also allows the publisher, in this case Craftton, to flip a switch at any point they want to and revoke your access while keeping your money. Because again, if you agree to that agreement, they can now do that legally. The idea here is that if SKG proceeds forward, they can remove or even limit this feature that is being used broadly because obviously if you paid money for something, then why are you losing access to it when it comes to things out of your control, right? I think we can all agree that's really stupid and needs to be removed.

[00:11:52]Another part of the meeting was on the important cultural and historical significance of what video games are as an art form. That we should not look at them like some disposable pieces of garbage, but as the art that they are intended to be, like Cory in the House for Nintendo DS or Darksiders, for example. God, I love Darksiders. Anyway, the idea here is not only does the legislative body here want to protect games for consumers, cuz it should be a right of everybody who buys and plays them, but these games need to be protected the same way that music or art pieces are as well. After all, sure, the Mona Lisa is up in some museum for everybody to gawk yet, but would you also agree that Super Mario or Zelda or Final Fantasy is also art and should be treated as such too? I think it should at various points as well during the meeting, which again I'll link in the description if you want to watch it yourself. I'm just paraphrasing it because otherwise we would be here all day is that they want to reach a consensus when it comes to better communication when it comes to consumers and the life cycle of said video games.

[00:12:49]A good example of this currently is actually Destiny 2, which I'm sure you heard that about that story of plenty already, but it is a great example here because Destiny 2 had its live service operations cease effective immediately and many players are now being left in the dark now on the future of that series and what Bungie and Sony did with Destiny 2 is exactly the kind of thing that worries people because sure, it's still playable. But the question then becomes, well, for how long though? If a game like a Destiny 2 keeps losing money, will it too fall into the same unplayable state as the other games that SKG and the like have fought for in the past already? Cuz Subnotica like Destiny has the possibility to be removed as well. Not saying that it will, but the fact that it can in the first place is kind of the problem, right? So, in this first clip from the meeting, we have a Greek member of the group who is the European Commissioner for Sustainable Transport and Tourism who was in attendance as seen here. His name is Apostto. I am going to butcher this guy's last name. Tik Costas. I definitely said that wrong. But anyways, here he is speaking to the group about SKG and what they need to do. So, please watch this. And we're now examining the ECI and preparing a reply.

[00:14:00]We are not yet in a position to issue detailed comments on this initiative.

[00:14:09]Nevertheless, I would like to highlight the importance of fair and transparent conditions.

[00:14:14]As European consumers, gamers should be entitled to enjoy the digital services that they have paid for as provided in their contract and in accordance with their reasonable expectations.

[00:14:30]We also agree that the European video games industry stands to gain from innovating and adapting business models in a way that meets consumer expectations.

[00:14:42]At the same time, we must highlight the complexity of the issue at stake.

[00:14:53]As part of our assessment, we will also examine how existing rules apply and whether they would require further clarifications.

[00:15:00]So, I trust that this debate will address the various facets of the problem and further develop some of the arguments put forward at the 16th of April hearing in the European Parliament.

[00:15:11]the commission that will then finalize its reply in the form of a communication to be presented before the summer. And following this and everything that gets said, Apostilus then comes back to close out the meeting by confirming that everything discussed during the hearing is going to be taken very seriously and that is what is at stake here goes against what many of the consumer protection laws in place are there for.

[00:15:37]So please watch this too. Honorable members, I would like to uh thank you for your very valuable contributions today which give us plenty of u valuable insights to reflect on as we are developing our analysis and our response.

[00:15:58]It has highlighted the complexity of the issue which sits at the crossroads of several public policies.

[00:16:08]So this rich exchange of views also shows how European citizens initiatives allow people to put the issue they care about directly on the European agenda.

[00:16:23]So I wish to thank all of you honorable members for your interventions and um for your support for the direct democratic engagement of our citizens in setting the EU's agenda.

[00:16:38]And as I said earlier earlier, we are working to present the proposal the communication the soonest possible. Thank you very much.

[00:16:49]>> And as you just saw, he said they want to get this into effect as soon as possible and they are taking it seriously because it is serious, right?

[00:16:57]Like this matters. like Apostil said, this is something that infringes on many rights. And it's very, very good to see the European Commissioner on tourism and all of that, taking this as serious as he is, I have a feeling we're probably going to be seeing more of this guy in the future when it comes to this whole thing, too. So, the current plan is to have a decision made by the summer, so June to August 2026, somewhere in that time frame. That's what I'm guessing.

[00:17:20]And I also wanted to close out this video with what Marquetta Gregorova, I think that's how you say her name, a Czech representative of European Parliament, had to say about this entire initiative as well. So please listen to what she has to say here.

[00:17:34]Dear colleagues, nearly 1.3 million Europeans signed the stop destroying video games initiative. They deserve our serious engagement and they deserve it in good faith. Let me be clear about what this initiative asks. When a company ends support for a game that people have already bought and paid for, it must leave that game in a working state rather than reaching into our devices and switching it off. It does not ask for free service forever. It does not ask for endless updates. It asks that what we paid for cannot be deliberately destroyed. So I am happy to hear from you, Commissioner. You take it seriously. However, at the last three public hearings, Mr. Amabon Abamonte on behalf of commission repeated the arguments of handful of the largest publishers almost word for word that always online is simply a technical necessity that this is really a copyright question that consumer rights must somehow be removed for consumer safety. Dear commission, these arguments do not reflect how games actually work and they do not reflect what these citizens are asking for. Players have kept Counterstrike and Minecraft running on their servers for over a decade, which means that the only thing standing between a paid for game and its destruction is not technology. It is a business decision. If the commission really would believe these arguments, then buying isn't owning and piracy isn't stealing. And as a pirate, last time I checked, you disagreed with those statements. Thank you.

[00:19:15]And I think Marquetta said it perfectly.

[00:19:17]And when we place this up against Subnotica 2 and the Destiny 2 stuff that I mentioned before, this all perfectly encapsulates what I was talking about here into a nice neat little package that when you have a game like a Subnotica 2 with its broad account termination powers, its restrictions of VPNs, its sudden rights over mods and language that says it can discipline those who can go out of their social norms in their EULA, whatever that means. It's clear why this sort of thing needs to go through and win. Now that you know that you own nothing, it's no surprise the response has been as radioactive, right? This is why SKG or stop destroying games is needed because knowing that games can be altered, shut down, or revoked at any time is why this is so important. Subnotica 2 maybe didn't want to be a part of this conversation. But unfortunately for them, they have unknowingly become a cautionary tale for the rest of the games that are out here. That it doesn't matter what good will you have, people will still leave anyways once they catch wind of your true intentions. And as Marquetta said there, this is not a debate on technology. This is firmly a debate about business practices and that alone. And Subnotica 2, like the many publishers out here wanting more control like always, has grown the backlash they received because that trust is being challenged again. The scariest part of this entire situation is what it represents. Because 10 years ago, most people would have laughed at the idea that players would need a consumer rights movement just to argue that they should retain meaningful access to games that they already purchased. But now that debate is it's mainstream, man. It really is. And Subnotica 2 unintentionally became one of the clearest examples yet of why people are so worried. Because once the audiences out here start feeling like that they're renting their entertainment under increasingly restrictive terms, every controversy, it has stopped feeling isolated and it all just starts feeling systemic instead. And right now that feeling is spreading really, really fast. So I thank you for watching.

[00:21:11]Again, if you want to see the SKG hearing, link is in the description box below. Let me know what you think. Have a great day. Subscribe if you'd like to.

[00:21:17]and I'll see you next time.