Thinking about it more if the eu passed any bill like this it would immediately end all gaming in the eu.
Sure, publishers would suddenly quit one of the biggest markets in the world that has western buying power and cut their revenue by a third or so. Also, that would end all development of games in Europe overnight.
You realize that region locks are mainly in place so people don't buy games from third-world countries, because the games tend to be cheaper there?
1: we know you built in an online check deep into the game code to act as an antipiracy DRM measure but now you have to build a backdoor in that can be activated with a flip of a switch making it trivial to pirate your game
Most of the publishers use off-the-shelf stuff like Denuvo for copy protection. And the games get pirated anyway. In most cases the publisher releases an update with a Denuvo-free version after a few years, which for some odd reason has better performance.
There even was a case where publisher just released the cracked version. I think it was some Batman game.
2: we know you built in always online games as a service and to improve multi-player competitiveness you moved lots of computational checks to server side to cut down on aim bots and other cheats but now everything has to be client side and hackable
As someone with knowledge in the field: No, you don't. Because of latency between you and the server (and wildy varying latency between players) having computations off-loaded is very iffy. How much latency can you tolerate? Speech can be perceived as undelayed up to around 70ms.
Then there is the issue with packet loss. Have you ever played a Korean MMO? Some of those have rubberbanding, resetting the player position on the client. It is one of the more frustrating experiences you can have.
Third, computations tend to require data, and you have to send them up from the client, and maybe the results down. So you need bandwidth. This is what probably killed EverQuest Next/Landmark: Because players were amazed that you had destructible terrain and all that, but now you have to update the terrain on all the clients, online and offline. So if you have 20 people in the area, all those players need to get terrain updates pronto. And those that log in need the updates downloaded to them.
This is why for anti-cheat some companies have moved to kernel-level anticheats (Riot with Vanguard), secretive scanners (Blizzard with Warden) and off-the shelf stuff like Easy Anticheat. There is also behavioral monitoring, but this analyzing the data that has already sent to the server, e.g. movements, and running it through machine learning.
3: we know this is an mmo which literally cannot function as a stand alone and requires maintaining an account with us and connecting to our servers but you need to Baloon your budget 200% giving your game the kingdom of amalur treatment and converting it to offline single player and go bankrupt before you can even launch online mode despite selling over 1.25 million copies in the first 90 days
First, you have the history backwards. Kingdoms of Amalur was an already developed RPG with a studio that got cut off by their publisher. Curt bought it (game + studio) to create a funnel into the MMO, which in itself wasn't a bad idea. So the game got retrofitted to the Studio 38 lore. The game itself had nothing to do with the MMO, it was developed independently and even almost complete when 38 Studios bought it.
That the game made no money even though they sold over a million copies was due to a bad publishing deal. Because someone didn't read the fine print, had too high expectations for its release, or simply didn't care because it wasn't his money. This seems to have been a recurring theme in the history of 38 Studios.
Second, you can develop private servers for most MMOs. Quite successfully so, if I may say, if you look at P99 and Turtle WoW.