How about "you need to release the binaries for the servers if you turn them off"? The intent of this sort of regulation is to prevent bait-and-switches were games become unplayable after players have invested their time and money.
Fundamentally, entertainment and technology both are time limited experiences and can't reasonably be expected to last forever. Usually games get shut off when the playerbase has already moved on -- even if the binaries are available, you'd likely be playing in a ghost town.
This is clearly not true. Many forms of entertainment and technology have continued to exist since their creation and can be expected to continue for as long as people exist to want them. All kinds of games have been around for a very very long time (for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mancala). I have an Atari 2600 that I pull out from time to time and it still works, but even when the hardware fails every atari game is available through emulation. We have the technology to preserve entertainment so that it survives. More importantly, we have the ability to adapt entertainment so that it thrives in new ways.
I imagine that in 1920 you'd be arguing that songs were intended to be "time limited experiences that can't be expected to last forever" because they were recorded on fragile wax cylinders. Thankfully we've realized that not only is it possible for those recordings to be preserved but they can be re-recorded, remixed, saved to new forms of media, and uploaded to the internet. Why should video games be any different?
They are expected to run for at least a certain amount of time though, so maybe the solution is a requirement to post how many years it's guaranteed to be around, and if it isn't kept around that long, the server needs to be made available.
I don't think it's particularly relevant what hardware it's supposed to run on. Trade secrets are a legal privilege, so it's totally fair for society to say that certain other factors are more important in this extraordinarily limited set of circumstances, and if you're baking credentials into your server code directly, that's kind of your own fault, and I don't see "intentionally doing things in a riskier way" as something valuable to preserve.
The actual implementation is very important.
> Or is there some other emergent effect you're concerned about that you expect me to be able to infer?
Removing the unneeded snark, yes. A well intended, but poorly implemented law will not have the desired effect. If the law states that F2P games are exempt, for example (as Stop Killing Games has suggested), you'll find a massive swing towards free games with $60/80/100 in-game purchases to access the actual content.