Discussion on piracy
I'll just leave this here...
<a href="http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_1.html" target="_blank">http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_1.html</a>
(skipped first few chapters, skimmed middle, got interested in the last four or so, feel vaguely guilty even though I rarely pirate)
<a href="http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_1.html" target="_blank">http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_1.html</a>
(skipped first few chapters, skimmed middle, got interested in the last four or so, feel vaguely guilty even though I rarely pirate)
Comments
<b>- Anyone who pirates games and thinks they are justified for doing so should read this.
- Anyone directly or remotely connected to the games industry should read this.
- Anyone -<u>anyone</u>- who wants to take part in any discussion regarding piracy or DRM, should read this.</b>
[Edit] Thanks for posting, Align. This is probably the most important thing I've read all year, and that includes a newly formed work contract and <i>Starship Troopers</i> <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
But, seriously: read it.
People on slashdot seem to be enjoying talking about it.
<a href="http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/12/20/178259" target="_blank">http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/12/20/178259</a>
1. His conclusion that people used Steam mainly used it because of their love for Valve. He doesn't take into account that people were forced to use it for games they already owned, versus a new game they bought with the other DRM methods. People loved CS too much to suddenly stop playing just because of Steam so it had time to grow on them.
2. His whole house lock analogy, which he admits is basically a useless analogy since the DRM is broken once and then distributed. It's more like someone removes all the locks on all houses and then lets people into them.
3. The fact that people still uses Windows proves that anything they do people are ok with now. I think it's fairly obvious, people need to use Windows to play a majority of games easily... which is what this whole article is about: the piracy of those games.
It makes me sad to see even indie games, like World of Goo pirated so much. But a good read on the whole, a lot more balanced than anything I have read and most of it I agree with. People are just too damn cheap <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />
1. His conclusion that people used Steam mainly used it because of their love for Valve. He doesn't take into account that people were forced to use it for games they already owned, versus a new game they bought with the other DRM methods. People loved CS too much to suddenly stop playing just because of Steam so it had time to grow on them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Not entirely true. When Steam came out there was a replacement version of WON created by the people to serve people who rejected Steam as it stood. It's not clear if WON2 enjoyed any updates to CS that were made afterwards, but there was an alternative which did have an actual playerbase.
<!--QuoteBegin-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Opponent_Network+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Opponent_Network)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->After the shutdown of WON, some players continued to run a patched version of the retail versions of Half-Life or Counter-Strike, which connects to a WON replacement called No-WON (or WON2), and allows users to use the original server browser to connect to Half-Life servers, and their various mods (including Counter-Strike 1.5, and a Steamless version of 1.6), much as they could before WON's shutdown.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1696435:date=Dec 20 2008, 08:24 PM:name=KungFuDiscoMonkey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(KungFuDiscoMonkey @ Dec 20 2008, 08:24 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1696435"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Long article is long but it was an interesting read.
People on slashdot seem to be enjoying talking about it.
<a href="http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/12/20/178259" target="_blank">http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/12/20/178259</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Yes, and 90% of them seem to be idiots, either who haven't actually read the article or who have failed to grasp the concepts (and in some cases: hard facts) being presented. I'll take this comment as an example:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So yes, I agree that high prices don't justify copyright infringement. Then again, how much is there out there that's even worth the cost of a blank dvd?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->You are not buying a blank DVD, you are buying (or if you are a pirate: illagally procuring) something that obviously gives you more enjoyment than a blank DVD, or you wouldn't have bothered to search and download it in the first place. How much time can you 'enjoy' a blank DVD for?
Let's -for the sake of argument- assume that it is a minute (a liberal estimate at best); if you download one of these games and play for anything more than a minute your argument is void. If you play for just over a minute and decide it's not for you, you should have read the reviews. Either way, if there was no demo available, you have deliberately circumvented the law to try out something that costs for free. You don't decide what something costs, the creators do. If you don't agree with the cost, you simply do not procure it. That is the bottom line.
There are too many idiots in this world, I tell you. You would be flogged in the Starship Troopers universe for this sort of brazen disregard for the law. Society is too soft on people who disobey the law flagrantly and then try to make proposterous excuses in their defence; excuses that are so asinine they reflect only on the subject's ineptitude to fully grasp the situations and concepts involved. The 'idiots' in this case, deserve nothing less than education, not sympathy or condonement.
I tried the demo of that game, and I can't figure out why people even bother pirating it.
Which brings me to my next question. Fast forward eight years in the future. I want to replay Mass Effect for the 3rd/4th time. I have to call some hot line and get permission -- but will they even be supporting that feature anymore? Will the game be too old?
I've always seen the "but your OS/Microsoft Office copies have install limits too!" That's true, but I don't go around installing Excel five times because I feel like creating a histogram for fun. I also don't uninstall my OS to make room when my hard drive fills up. Video games are different from application software and should be treated as such.
It's a ######ty situation, there's no doubt about it. The developers want to protect their hard work and by doing so they are inconveniencing those who actually want to purchase their games. I understand they include DRM in order to promote people buying their games during their initial release period, however, DRM always gets cracked. Once that happens, a pirated copy becomes more appealing due to the fact that it isn't limited by DRM.
If I were to pirate a game it's not because I'm trying to save $50. It's because I know the illegal copy will not have any annoying DRM related features. Sure, maybe I'll never install the game more than three times but why would I pay money to potentially never be able to play it again? That just doesn't make any sense to me.
One thing though... <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Consider one last example of a protection method which has been subject to similar levels of hysteria and misinformation, and which every legitimate Windows user has installed on their system right now: Windows Product Activation. It was introduced in 2001 as part of Windows XP despite massive opposition, and again in 2007 in Windows Vista, and once again to be included in Windows 7 in the near future.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->*waggles Windows 2000 system in front of writer's face* <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/nerd-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="::nerdy::" border="0" alt="nerd-fix.gif" />
I did it for 2 reasons:
1. I had no money, and couldn't get a job. I've been on unemployment for quite awhile, and am now going to college. Outside of my internet and food, I can afford nothing. And don't say "Then get a job"- Unemployment isn't that easy on a 20 year old. I have to turn in a list of 25 places(which they randomly call to check) where I've turned in resumes. It has become a job looking for a job, and thanks to a ###### economy, its not getting any easier. Lucky for me, I can still go to college.
2. I could. This didn't happen because of itself- it happened because of #1. If I had a steady income where I could afford a game per month, maybe even every 2 months, I wouldn't pirate. But this was the easiest way of getting entertainment.
Its wrong, I'm a ######, I should be flogged, blah blah blah I don't give a ###### about your opinions. Just these are my reasons.
Interesting read all the same.
Spore IV is starting up:
MsgBox: Please shove catheter into uretra and press OK.
*Shove
*Click OK
MsgBox: Failed to take urine sample. please shove it in a little depper.
In 50 years you could have biometric DRM.
Wanne play? Sit in front of the PC, let the camera scan your face/fingerprints and then deliver a blood sample. All of this is checked against EAs database and presto you can play the game. (For 1h, after which you have to repeat the whole process.)
Which brings me to my next question. Fast forward eight years in the future. I want to replay Mass Effect for the 3rd/4th time. I have to call some hot line and get permission -- but will they even be supporting that feature anymore? Will the game be too old?
etc<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Only the worst DRMs work like that - most 'refund' an install when you uninstall the game.
But a game being "too old" may be a serious problem. Can't give any actual examples though, so perhaps it's best not to speak of what I don't know anything about...
<!--quoteo(post=1696471:date=Dec 21 2008, 08:43 AM:name=Quaunaut)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Quaunaut @ Dec 21 2008, 08:43 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1696471"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I know piracy is wrong, but I did it. I don't try and justify it.
I did it for 2 reasons:<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
that IS justifying it for you
If you argument then becomes: "I pirate because I don't want to pay for bad implementation of DRM, I object to it" then again, your argument is invalid. If you object secretively there is no evidence for your reasons for objection. It is impossible for a publisher to tell whether you pirated the game because you couldn't afford it, because you are just greedy, because you get a kick out of stealing, because you are ignorant and didn't actually know the game was for sale, because you believe in some sort of 'free market' concept or because you were actually objecting to something in particular: the install limit.
The only way that argument could hold up to criticism is if you made some effort to contact the publisher (anonymously) to object to the particular implementation method of DRM and offer feedback/suggestions towards a situation where you <i>would</i> be happy with a particular form of DRM.
I've actually done that before. The one down side to doing this, of course, is that your game is more or less a pirated copy at that point and you're unable to play with the latest patches until they get cracked as well. So you buy the game, have to go through extra steps to avoid their DRM, then are unable to enjoy the updates/any online features that the game has.
Which brings me back to my point in the quoted text: That just doesn't make sense to me.
However, if we're talking about me personally, I don't really pirate games at all. I don't mind just not playing them. For example, I was looking forward to Mass Effect (never actually played it, was just using it as an example in my above post) but did not buy it due to the install limits. Although I'm sure the game is great, if I don't buy the game I'll probably be too lazy to pirate it. I realize most gamers are not like this.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->where you would be happy with a particular form of DRM.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't mind "smart DRM" at all. This includes CD-Keys for online play, patches / content updates for people with valid keys / etc. I feel that "stupid DRM" are things like install limits or requiring that the CD be in the drive in order to play.
Am I the only one that doesn't have a problem with needing the CD in the drive in order to play? All of my games sit a foot away from my PC.
But I don't want my CD-drive to spin up and make noise for no good reason.
The PC isn't a console. It has a hard drive. If you're going to make me sit through a half hour long install, then put the entire goddamn game on my computer and let me put the CD back in the box and put that on my shelf.
Its a simple solution.
Anymore, I'm this way too. There just isn't much out there that A) I can play on my system without buying some new hardware and B) I think would actually be worth it anyway. Portal is the most recent exception to this. But also, independent freeware games have gotten to the point where I generally find them more enjoyable than WWII-This-time-with-extra-pretty-TM or Generic-Sci-Fi-Shooter-XXI. I'm fairly certain that I've now played more dwarf fortress (DF and Adventure modes) than all the commercial PC games I've ever owned combined.
My computer is pretty decent, but I just feel like I've played it all. A buddy I work with bought Dead Space and I played it for about 2 and a half hours at his place. It was a combination of Doom 3 / Resident Evil 4 / Bioshock. For example, it was just the standard "restore this system! Watch out for something scary like a body flying across the room or something in the vent. Ok good, now go get this system back online! Great, now let's tell you a little bit about the story. After that, we're gonna have you restore a few more systems."
It feels like I've done it all before.
Then, on the other end, if the game is too wide open I just lose interest. As was the case with Stalker: Clear Sky.
I think I'm just bored of single player games.
For me, the discussion is closely tied to buying music CDs versus downloading the mp3s and listening to them that way (or then burning them on CDs). You know that today, <a href="http://www.nme.com/news/various-artists/37426" target="_blank">a good 96%</a> of people between the ages of 14-24 download music illegally. I don't pretend to know the reason why, but I think it's safe to assume that the model of music distribution in general is changing drastically and that music companies are having a hard time adjusting to the change.
I download music freely from the web without guilt. My justification is simple. If I couldn't download it from the web, I wouldn't buy the CD anyway. This I know, because I'm not the type of person to buy a CD for one song as I enjoy many different artists.
I think games should adopt a more "play for a couple days, and if you like it, buy it" type feel. If it were like that, I doubt there'd be as many pirated games for the simple fact that you don't have the excuse to pirate a game if not to simply try it out without buying. I think many pirate a game to try it out without buying thinking they'd buy it later only even after they play it and enjoy it, it becomes quite an unattractive course of action to buy a game you already have.
I think it's safe to assume that it's because having a large library of music is great, and it's easy and cheap to pirate. "I want this music and I'm not going to buy it in the store or on itunes when I can get it for free on the pirate bay."
Are record companies going to create CDs with songs from various artists, all of which I love and all of which songs I enjoy? No.
Am I going to buy all the CDs of all artists I <b>do</b> love containing the songs I enjoy? No.
Therefore, record companies don't lose any money from me, at least.
That assumes they're worth more than time. Not everything has a monetary value.
I present you with the scenario that I don't, in fact, download mp3s.
Hawkeye, you don't download mp3s, do you buy CDs then? No.
Same result.