Stardock's method is support authentication. The game is perfectly playable and totally functional without special interaction beyond "install". Where support authentication comes in is that in order to get the updates and additional content, you have to go through their online system. It's similar to what BioWare has done after learning Mass Effect's DRM on the PC version was a massive headache. "Want the expanded content and support? Well, you have to sign into our system."
It's still mildly irritating for people on limited-bandwidth connections like any provided by the oligopoly of wireless companies. Spore had some similar stupidity but you could circumvent excessive bandwidth usage by "authenticating" the game then killing your connection. As for if you can pull that off with DA or ME2, I haven't tested (of course, the fact that EA's servers on launch day for ME2 were, surprise freaking surprise, down due to "unexpected" traffic still doesn't make this method any less pure evil--just less so than things like SecuROM and Starforce).
I don't know if anything's come of it but I think there is still a class action lawsuit against EA for problems associated with their use of invasive DRM.
<!--quoteo(post=1749730:date=Jan 29 2010, 10:14 PM:name=Comprox)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Comprox @ Jan 29 2010, 10:14 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1749730"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My problem with this opinion is that the *only* people this DRM will affect is your legitimate customers. The pirated copy will remove this and the game wil be pirated regarldess of this new DRM.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Of course, any anti-pirate measure will eventually be circumvented - nothing is physically impossible to get through.
But the by far most important thing to prevent is day-one (or zero) piracy, so the average impatient kid cba to download it off the internet when he can get it faster from the store. Why do you think many companies eventually remove DRM completely in a patch long after the game's been out? And of course, there aren't that many legitimate customers that are bothered by this that also have the technical know-how to do something about it (like pirating).
This DRM sounds pretty ingrained in the product. What if it can't be circumvented? You can't pirate a lot of multiplayer games, right? It sounds like they're trying to apply the same principles to single player. if the entire product has to be dialed into their server 100% of the time, then it's obviously not just a quick CD check at launch that hackers could easily patch out...
<!--quoteo(post=1749727:date=Jan 29 2010, 04:02 PM:name=DiscoZombie)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DiscoZombie @ Jan 29 2010, 04:02 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1749727"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This sounds as dumb to me as it does to you guys, but I will play the devil's advocate. Is piracy not a large problem? Does anyone play games on a computer with no internet anymore? Would this actually impact anyone who owns the game legitimately?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, basically what Comprox said. To my knowledge, just about every form of DRM has been cracked / hacked. In the end DRM only affects legitimate customers, usually for the worse.
Piracy is a major problem for PC developers. I'm sure devs and publishers are aware of the counter arguments towards DRM but they may feel as if they have no other choice. Video games these days have huge budgets and to release one without any protection may be viewed as a high risk that could severely damage the publisher of the game in question. So they turn to DRM because they feel it's their only option.
When DRM discussions come up ultimately Stardock is mentioned, as they were here. Not to knock Stardock games, but I sincerely doubt Sins of a Solar Empire or Gal Civ had a production cost anywhere close to Mass Effect 1 or 2, CoD4:MW or CoD4:MW2, Dragon Age, etc. When you're looking at the bottom line for the cost of game, and it's development costs are $40 - 50 million and it's marketing / distribution costs are $150 million (as in the case of <a href="http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/51534/Modern-Warfare-2-Cost-200-Million-Hidden-Game-Modes-Unlocked-On-PC" target="_blank">Modern Warfare 2</a>) it's easy to see why some protection of your investment is required.
I think combating piracy should be part of the video game design process and not DRM tacked on at the end. If you create a desirable multiplayer experience or some kind of community integration (see Spore) then a dev/publisher could implement basic and non-intrusive DRM that leaves potential pirates with no choice but to purchase the game to fully enjoy the game.
<!--quoteo(post=1749755:date=Jan 29 2010, 05:31 PM:name=DiscoZombie)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DiscoZombie @ Jan 29 2010, 05:31 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1749755"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This DRM sounds pretty ingrained in the product. What if it can't be circumvented...if the entire product has to be dialed into their server 100% of the time, then it's obviously not just a quick CD check at launch that hackers could easily patch out...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
"Dial Home" DRM methods have already been cracked in applications and video games. There is no doubt in my mind that AC2 will be cracked and available for download within 72 hours of it's release.
X_StickmanNot good enough for a custom title.Join Date: 2003-04-15Member: 15533Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1749755:date=Jan 29 2010, 10:31 PM:name=DiscoZombie)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DiscoZombie @ Jan 29 2010, 10:31 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1749755"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This DRM sounds pretty ingrained in the product. What if it can't be circumvented? You can't pirate a lot of multiplayer games, right? It sounds like they're trying to apply the same principles to single player. if the entire product has to be dialed into their server 100% of the time, then it's obviously not just a quick CD check at launch that hackers could easily patch out...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If it's in there, it can be circumvented. If it takes someone decompiling then recompiling (note: I have no idea what these words mean in programming, but I heard someone use them once) the entire game, they'll do it. Some crackers take it on as a challenge; most of those people do it for themselves (just for the challenge) and then don't release the result, but someone will.
You can pirate multiplayer games, pretty much any of them. Depending on the server system the games use, however, you might be restricted to pirated servers. Which *will* be set up. Hell there are entire networks of pirate servers for games like TF2, which is supposed to work only through steam.
As for the "it helps prevent day one piracy, which is the biggest issue" argument, that's probably the strongest one in support of DRM I've ever heard. Unfortunately, the DRM lasts significantly longer than day one. It'll still be part of the game 1-2 years down the line, unless they release something to patch it out.
That'd actually be a good balance for the short term, until someone figures out something better. Have DRM like the proposed on here on released games, but have it officially patched out 1-2 months after the initial release date.
<!--quoteo(post=1749750:date=Jan 29 2010, 04:22 PM:name=Align)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Align @ Jan 29 2010, 04:22 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1749750"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why do you think many companies eventually remove DRM completely in a patch long after the game's been out?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If they were only concerned about day-zero pirating, why remove the DRM after several months?
Exception being THQ and Relic. THQ requires games to have DRM. Relic was like "OK, first patch removes the DRM". Wheee!
Also, I'm still waiting for my single-player HL2's DRM to get yoinked. Hasn't happened yet? Dang....
In reference to the Stardock system, you'd be surprised. Sins was a top 10 seller for that year, cost a decent chunk of change, and is a "undervalued" genre. Granted, it's no zomg EA threw money at it game, but if you're looking at ability to sell the Stardock model does pretty well. Also, please note that Civ4 is perhaps the highest selling product of all time and continues to sell. You know what DRM it has? CD Key. =] EDIT: specifically, it asked for CD key to install and for you to have the CD in drive to play. Easily circumvented using a .iso mounted via DAEMON Tools or such virtual drive, or cracked exe. Most recent patch removed even that DRM.
<!--quoteo(post=1749755:date=Jan 30 2010, 01:31 AM:name=DiscoZombie)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DiscoZombie @ Jan 30 2010, 01:31 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1749755"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What if it can't be circumvented?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That's a silly question, isn't it?
<!--quoteo(post=1749781:date=Jan 30 2010, 05:44 AM:name=spellman23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (spellman23 @ Jan 30 2010, 05:44 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1749781"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You know what DRM it has? CD Key. =]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually it's that exact reason I'm happy to cope with whatever ###### Steam throws at me. Having to constantly swap CDs and try not to go insane over the constant disc humming is quite possibly the worst hassle of any DRM I can personally imagine.
Well, besides whatever Codemasters did to Dirt 2 that prevents me from even playing it.
<!--quoteo(post=1749727:date=Jan 29 2010, 09:02 PM:name=DiscoZombie)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DiscoZombie @ Jan 29 2010, 09:02 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1749727"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This sounds as dumb to me as it does to you guys, but I will play the devil's advocate. Is piracy not a large problem? Does anyone play games on a computer with no internet anymore? Would this actually impact anyone who owns the game legitimately?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Piracy costs companies money yes, but adding in things to try and stop it doesn't work, because people just hack them out and release a slightly broken version of the game for free, but as it's for free it doesn't matter if it's slightly broken. You'll accept the occasional hang from something you downloaded for free but not from something you paid 40 quid for.
To be honest I think the best way to counteract piracy is to offer useful benefits which can only be done with a legitimate copy. Like steam, steam lets me use a unified account and chat system in any official steam game as well as web access through the overlay which can be invaluable in games which don't support windowed mode. It lets me play without disks, and it lets me quickly reinstall things when I change computers without having to enter a million CD keys. I deliberately buy things on steam because I like the extra stuff it does. I only buy retail if it's cheaper or if it already integrates with steam anyway like dawn of war 2. Valve on the other hand gets a functional DRM system.
Having DRM which can only exist to cause problems in the game is pointless, because it <i>will</i> get removed and it <i>will</i> annoy anyone who buys legit and therefore leaves it in the game.
<!--quoteo(post=1749748:date=Jan 29 2010, 10:15 PM:name=Syriquez)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Syriquez @ Jan 29 2010, 10:15 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1749748"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Stardock's method is support authentication. The game is perfectly playable and totally functional without special interaction beyond "install". Where support authentication comes in is that in order to get the updates and additional content, you have to go through their online system. It's similar to what BioWare has done after learning Mass Effect's DRM on the PC version was a massive headache. "Want the expanded content and support? Well, you have to sign into our system."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not hugely fond of that system myself, I don't want to have to sign into some horrible company website and enter three differend codes and download a few hundred megs of data and install 3 patches just to get all the game content, it's just hassle, hell I played ME2 all the way through without the extra content because I coudln't be arsed doing the stupid login crap.
<!--quoteo(post=1750114:date=Feb 1 2010, 06:25 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Feb 1 2010, 06:25 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1750114"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm not hugely fond of that system myself, I don't want to have to sign into some horrible company website and enter three differend codes and download a few hundred megs of data and install 3 patches just to get all the game content, it's just hassle, hell I played ME2 all the way through without the extra content because I coudln't be arsed doing the stupid login crap.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree here too. The only reason I even got it was the game was taking forever to decrypt and someone warned me I had to download it. And I find this argument holds little water, as the cracked copies of ME2 contained all the DLC in one nice, easy download. Why can't Steam tell I ordered it all and just download it all at once too? It was more hassle for me, having bought the game.
<!--quoteo(post=1749648:date=Jan 29 2010, 12:59 AM:name=lolfighter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (lolfighter @ Jan 29 2010, 12:59 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1749648"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Does it work at all though? I distinctly recall it just doing a whole lot of "this game is not available in offline mode."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That only applies to games like TFT2. I've used offline mode recently, at least for every single player valve game it works great, I can't remember having trouble with any game specifically, but at the same time I didn't really try every game I own.
<!--quoteo(post=1750189:date=Feb 2 2010, 12:42 AM:name=Comprox)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Comprox @ Feb 2 2010, 12:42 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1750189"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And I find this argument holds little water, as the cracked copies of ME2 contained all the DLC in one nice, easy download. Why can't Steam tell I ordered it all and just download it all at once too? It was more hassle for me, having bought the game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That's the fun part: Steam can do that - that is, it pretty much exists for the sole reason of not worrying about patches/DLC - EA just couldn't be arsed with that. Which is, I'm sure, a huge surprise to everyone.
It's kind of ironic, really. Piracy will always be more convenient, regardless of DRM, DLC, patches, or anything else... It's free.
<!--quoteo(post=1750199:date=Feb 1 2010, 05:25 PM:name=Draco_2k)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Draco_2k @ Feb 1 2010, 05:25 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1750199"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's kind of ironic, really. Piracy will always be more convenient, regardless of DRM, DLC, patches, or anything else... It's free.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Pretty stupid statement to make. Those who cannot afford the luxury of purchasing video games aside, convenience has nothing to do with price. Piracy may be more convenient when the game is released early, circumvents DRM, or when used to 'demo' the game but most gamers I know don't mind dropping $50 on a title. Speaking of demos, ever notice how PC games get screwed on them?
<!--quoteo(post=1750395:date=Feb 3 2010, 01:41 AM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Feb 3 2010, 01:41 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1750395"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->convenience has nothing to do with price<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> What.
<!--quoteo(post=1750395:date=Feb 3 2010, 01:41 AM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Feb 3 2010, 01:41 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1750395"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Speaking of demos, ever notice how PC games get screwed on them?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> PC market is pretty much the under-dog of the industry today, mostly due to development hardships and... Oh yeah. Piracy.
<!--quoteo(post=1750189:date=Feb 1 2010, 09:42 PM:name=Comprox)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Comprox @ Feb 1 2010, 09:42 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1750189"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I agree here too. The only reason I even got it was the game was taking forever to decrypt and someone warned me I had to download it. And I find this argument holds little water, as the cracked copies of ME2 contained all the DLC in one nice, easy download. Why can't Steam tell I ordered it all and just download it all at once too? It was more hassle for me, having bought the game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->I believe the EA login thing is something they're doing to try to create a captive audience for marketing, sales and game data aggregation purposes and as a portal for advertising and selling EA content.
All of the latest DLC for EA games has required you not to simply buy it and install it, or even authenticate via Steam, but to use an EA account. Dragon Age and Mass Effect have both used this system, not to mention Battlefield Heroes which requires a mandatory login. EA uses all this data to improve the game, to better tailor their marketing to their core customers and to collect sales data. Steam does the same thing, apart from Steam also offers a service, but the EA account offers nothing to you, it's completely self-serving. That's my reason for not getting the armour freebie codes that came with Dragon Age. I'm glad my flatmate got ME2 on the 360 and got the EA account setup or I wouldn't have had access to the free DLC character (or the explore the crashsite mission which apparently is pointless).
<!--quoteo(post=1750465:date=Feb 3 2010, 03:51 AM:name=Draco_2k)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Draco_2k @ Feb 3 2010, 03:51 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1750465"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->PC market is pretty much the under-dog of the industry today, mostly due to development hardships and... Oh yeah. Piracy.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For PC games piracy's only impact on sales is due to people not buying games due to: Not being able to resell a game when finished due to draconian DRM restrictions that eliminate reselling (so people can't sell their old games to buy new, which console gamers can do). Lack of demos for games (no, I'm not buying a demoless game for more than 10 bucks, because once it sucks you can't get a refund). Draconian DRM measures which make playing the game a chore, such as required online authentication for single player games, disc in drive requirements, etc. Releasing unfinished games that require a patch within a month to fix basic issues. Making a PC game with console limitations to avoid having to map different controls. The Batman Arkham Asylum demo on the PC sucks to play without a console controller, not to mention it would rotate constantly if a joystick was plugged in like America's Army 3 did, but unlike AA3 there was no way to turn the joystick input off...
I primarily play modifications of games or older games that are done patching because I avoid most of these issues, and I will know which ones are going to be enjoyable to play because there will be plenty of reviews with qualiy feedback instead of just game magazine reviews. I was looking forward to Spore, waited a month and found out the game was completely unlike what they had talked about doing so I didn't buy it. Despite the large amount of piracy reported for that game it still sold well: <a href="http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3170143" target="_blank">http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3170143</a>
They can cry in their tea all they want about 'lost sales' due to piracy but they only have themselves to blame for people not giving them money. The people who pirate because they can't afford or won't spend money on a particular title aren't lost sales because they wouldn't have bought it anyway.
<!--quoteo(post=1750520:date=Feb 3 2010, 06:44 PM:name=snooggums)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (snooggums @ Feb 3 2010, 06:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1750520"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->They can cry in their tea all they want about 'lost sales' due to piracy but they only have themselves to blame for people not giving them money. The people who pirate because they can't afford or won't spend money on a particular title aren't lost sales because they wouldn't have bought it anyway.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> While you bring up all very fair and glaring points... They still lose money they wouldn't have lost on consoles.
The equation of piracy to lost sales is asinine as there's no way to distinguish lost sales from sales you wouldn't make anyway, but this is the same reason you can't reverse the argument.
<!--quoteo(post=1750528:date=Feb 3 2010, 10:27 AM:name=Draco_2k)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Draco_2k @ Feb 3 2010, 10:27 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1750528"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->While you bring up all very fair and glaring points... They still lose money they wouldn't have lost on consoles.
The equation of piracy to lost sales is asinine as there's no way to distinguish lost sales from sales you wouldn't make anyway, but this is the same reason you can't reverse the argument.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why is there an assumption that any sales are lost at all? The presumes that there is a guaranteed number of sales.
Let's take the Battlefield series with some made up numbers: Battlefield 1942 - 300,000 Battlefield Vietnam - 400,000 Battlefield 2 - 1.2 million Battlefield 2142 - 800,000
Does the lower sales for 2142 mean that the game lost sales? Maybe people didn't like the futuristic setting or the in game advertisements. Maybe people bought BF2 for one of the various modern warfare mods that came out for it like Project Reality or Point of Existence when they wouldn't have bought the game anyway.
Let's say all four were pirated 500,000 times each. What number of those 500,000 are 'lost sales'? What if the person would never have purchased the game, even though they pirated it? What if all 500,000 pirates for BF 2142 only bought the game because they pirated it and saw it was worth buying?
The simple fact is people who are willing to pay money for something sold at retail will. Some people are cheap and will use something for free that they wouldn't anyway. Some people will only pay if someone make them, but they will be a small percentage of the people and you can't count them as last sales because they wouldn't have paid for it anyway.
Heck, I'm a BF2 pirate because I purchased BF2, registered my key and the DRM protection killed by CD player. Only that disc had problems reading (it's DRM related, they put errors on the disc to make it hard to copy) so it would stop and start repeatedly to verify the disc was valid. Only this disc had issues. So what I did was download a master copy of the disc, loaded it on a virtual drive to use with my original installation for verification and played that way. After a while I stopped playing so I had to download that copy again, and later I got a min-disc version before EA finally removed the disc check in the last patch.
So I downloaded 3 pirated copies of a game that I purchased just to be able to play it because the publisher added crappy DRM measures. That's right, my valid installation involved three pirated downloads which they claim is a lost sale. Sure it is an anecdote, but it is a good example of why counting 'downloads' as piracy is simply ridiculous.
Games can still be pirated for consoles, due to being able to resell the original game or being able to borrow it from a friend means most people don't bother. The lack of DRM impediments to console gaming is why their piracy is lower.
Anecdotally, I'm one of those frugal gamers. I rarely buy anything unless I'm sure I will enjoy it. I have only pre-ordered 3 games. Orange Box, L4D, and L4D2. The rest have been bought in package deals, sales, or after all my friends start hating me for not being able to talk about spoilers around me (i.e. the game was more popular than God, and for good reason).
I have also bought games specifically for mods. I bought the Civ4 pack simply to play Fall From Heaven. I almost bought the Crysis pack this last winter just to prepare for Mechwarrior Living Legends release.
Does that mean that any game downloaded is then a lost sale? Probably not. If anything, for me at least, a downloaded game is a potential sale. If I enjoy it enough, I will buy it. This actually occured for Psychonauts. I did a quick 24 hour trial on a friend's cracked copy, enjoyed it immensely, so I bought it on Steam. Yeah, I had to crack it to play it on my machine. I also have had a similar experience to snooggums where I had a perfectly valid purchased game, but the CD key provided was broken. I have no idea why (this was a Rollercoaster Tycoon game). So I nabbed myself a keygen and cracked my store bought copy.
So sure, I'm a minority. I know several people who never pay for their games. I know people who are quite religious about paying for every game. I also know some people with so much disposable income they don't care and just buy all of Steam (seriously, and he's a grad student and has over 60 hours logged just on Mass Effect 2).
<!--quoteo(post=1750520:date=Feb 3 2010, 03:44 PM:name=snooggums)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (snooggums @ Feb 3 2010, 03:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1750520"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->They can cry in their tea all they want about 'lost sales' due to piracy but they only have themselves to blame for people not giving them money. The people who pirate because they can't afford or won't spend money on a particular title aren't lost sales because they wouldn't have bought it anyway.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Piracy reduces the amount of money people are willing to pay for a game, because there's always a free alternative. Market where people are allowed to set the price they pay rarely works.
There are quite a few vicious circles with piracy. For example companies are unwilling to publish demos because they apparently help cracking the game. Then again people argue that the lack of demos encourages piracy.
Bad DRM is still bad DRM, but I can't see it justifying pre-emptive pirating before you run into troublesome DRM in a specific game.
<!--quoteo(post=1750542:date=Feb 3 2010, 08:25 PM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Feb 3 2010, 08:25 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1750542"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Market where people are allowed to set the price they pay rarely works.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
*Cough*
Thats exactly how a free market is supposed to work!
However, when only looking at a single game you have a classic monopoly situation, because only 1 publisher is offering a certain product. This in return means, that you would need to assume that every video game is the same and then look at the market as a whole. Now you have lots of people offering a single product and lots of people willing to buy.
The amount of money the average consumer is willing to pay, will dictate the price!
Spore lost at least one sale due to piracy - mine. I didn't actually intend to pirate the game (I try to be all righteous like that), but when I heard that it had been leaked before release... I couldn't resist. I really wanted that game BADLY. However, the game turned out to be a huge disappointment and I soon threw it out. If I hadn't pirated it, I would have bought it. And it's not like you can just get a refund.
<!--quoteo(post=1750547:date=Feb 3 2010, 06:50 PM:name=Faskalia)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Faskalia @ Feb 3 2010, 06:50 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1750547"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Thats exactly how a free market is supposed to work!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Isn't it more like the manufacturer sets the price and people decide whether they pay for it? I can't see people paying 5$ for cars being basis for any stable economical structure.
Or am I missing something completely obvious here?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->PC market is pretty much the under-dog of the industry today, mostly due to development hardships and... Oh yeah. Piracy.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And that justifies not releasing demos because...? I'm not saying you're trying to justify it but if that's what game publishers are thinking when they don't release demos then it's pretty clear to see how that's a contributing factor to piracy.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->While you bring up all very fair and glaring points... They still lose money they wouldn't have lost on consoles.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Money lost on consoles is just far harder to track. Walk into a gamestop / eb games / babbages. See how 80% of the store is covered in used games? That's equivalent to piracy on the PC but is far harder to trace compared to looking at how many times a torrent has been downloaded. More traditional forms of piracy still exist on consoles as we recently saw <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/11/12/cnet.xbox.live.ban/index.html" target="_blank">1 million xbox users</a> get banned for modifying their consoles.
Usually your posts don't suck, Draco, but you're way off the ball on this one.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I thought demos had just disappeared entirely. Is it only PC demos or what?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah dude, basically PC only. I was <i>shocked</i> when I recently bought my PS3 and found that nearly <i>every</i> game available has a demo, often released before the release date of the game. It's cool knowing how a game plays before buying it.
Sadness. Oh well, I am going to convince myself that only worthwhile games have demos, so if a game doesn't have a demo I simply won't bother with it because it's not worth my time. ^_^
<!--quoteo(post=1750593:date=Feb 3 2010, 05:14 PM:name=lolfighter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (lolfighter @ Feb 3 2010, 05:14 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1750593"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Sadness. Oh well, I am going to convince myself that only worthwhile games have demos, so if a game doesn't have a demo I simply won't bother with it because it's not worth my time. ^_^<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, plus whoring off reviews from friends/borrowing.
<!--quoteo(post=1750602:date=Feb 4 2010, 12:24 AM:name=spellman23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (spellman23 @ Feb 4 2010, 12:24 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1750602"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Well, plus whoring off reviews from friends/borrowing.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Anyone else got massive disagreement with most magazine reviews nowadays? I guess it's about finding one reliable source (friends?) and sticking with it, but still it I just don't feel like trusting reviews easily. Take Black & White for example, it has still got 90/100 in metacritic despite the game having so many massive flaws after you've shrugged off the first amazement.
Comments
It's still mildly irritating for people on limited-bandwidth connections like any provided by the oligopoly of wireless companies. Spore had some similar stupidity but you could circumvent excessive bandwidth usage by "authenticating" the game then killing your connection. As for if you can pull that off with DA or ME2, I haven't tested (of course, the fact that EA's servers on launch day for ME2 were, surprise freaking surprise, down due to "unexpected" traffic still doesn't make this method any less pure evil--just less so than things like SecuROM and Starforce).
I don't know if anything's come of it but I think there is still a class action lawsuit against EA for problems associated with their use of invasive DRM.
Of course, any anti-pirate measure will eventually be circumvented - nothing is physically impossible to get through.
But the by far most important thing to prevent is day-one (or zero) piracy, so the average impatient kid cba to download it off the internet when he can get it faster from the store. Why do you think many companies eventually remove DRM completely in a patch long after the game's been out?
And of course, there aren't that many legitimate customers that are bothered by this that also have the technical know-how to do something about it (like pirating).
Yeah, basically what Comprox said. To my knowledge, just about every form of DRM has been cracked / hacked. In the end DRM only affects legitimate customers, usually for the worse.
Piracy is a major problem for PC developers. I'm sure devs and publishers are aware of the counter arguments towards DRM but they may feel as if they have no other choice. Video games these days have huge budgets and to release one without any protection may be viewed as a high risk that could severely damage the publisher of the game in question. So they turn to DRM because they feel it's their only option.
When DRM discussions come up ultimately Stardock is mentioned, as they were here. Not to knock Stardock games, but I sincerely doubt Sins of a Solar Empire or Gal Civ had a production cost anywhere close to Mass Effect 1 or 2, CoD4:MW or CoD4:MW2, Dragon Age, etc. When you're looking at the bottom line for the cost of game, and it's development costs are $40 - 50 million and it's marketing / distribution costs are $150 million (as in the case of <a href="http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/51534/Modern-Warfare-2-Cost-200-Million-Hidden-Game-Modes-Unlocked-On-PC" target="_blank">Modern Warfare 2</a>) it's easy to see why some protection of your investment is required.
I think combating piracy should be part of the video game design process and not DRM tacked on at the end. If you create a desirable multiplayer experience or some kind of community integration (see Spore) then a dev/publisher could implement basic and non-intrusive DRM that leaves potential pirates with no choice but to purchase the game to fully enjoy the game.
<!--quoteo(post=1749755:date=Jan 29 2010, 05:31 PM:name=DiscoZombie)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DiscoZombie @ Jan 29 2010, 05:31 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1749755"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This DRM sounds pretty ingrained in the product. What if it can't be circumvented...if the entire product has to be dialed into their server 100% of the time, then it's obviously not just a quick CD check at launch that hackers could easily patch out...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
"Dial Home" DRM methods have already been cracked in applications and video games. There is no doubt in my mind that AC2 will be cracked and available for download within 72 hours of it's release.
If it's in there, it can be circumvented. If it takes someone decompiling then recompiling (note: I have no idea what these words mean in programming, but I heard someone use them once) the entire game, they'll do it. Some crackers take it on as a challenge; most of those people do it for themselves (just for the challenge) and then don't release the result, but someone will.
You can pirate multiplayer games, pretty much any of them. Depending on the server system the games use, however, you might be restricted to pirated servers. Which *will* be set up. Hell there are entire networks of pirate servers for games like TF2, which is supposed to work only through steam.
As for the "it helps prevent day one piracy, which is the biggest issue" argument, that's probably the strongest one in support of DRM I've ever heard. Unfortunately, the DRM lasts significantly longer than day one. It'll still be part of the game 1-2 years down the line, unless they release something to patch it out.
That'd actually be a good balance for the short term, until someone figures out something better. Have DRM like the proposed on here on released games, but have it officially patched out 1-2 months after the initial release date.
If they were only concerned about day-zero pirating, why remove the DRM after several months?
Exception being THQ and Relic. THQ requires games to have DRM. Relic was like "OK, first patch removes the DRM". Wheee!
Also, I'm still waiting for my single-player HL2's DRM to get yoinked. Hasn't happened yet? Dang....
In reference to the Stardock system, you'd be surprised. Sins was a top 10 seller for that year, cost a decent chunk of change, and is a "undervalued" genre. Granted, it's no zomg EA threw money at it game, but if you're looking at ability to sell the Stardock model does pretty well. Also, please note that Civ4 is perhaps the highest selling product of all time and continues to sell. You know what DRM it has? CD Key. =]
EDIT: specifically, it asked for CD key to install and for you to have the CD in drive to play. Easily circumvented using a .iso mounted via DAEMON Tools or such virtual drive, or cracked exe. Most recent patch removed even that DRM.
That's a silly question, isn't it?
<!--quoteo(post=1749781:date=Jan 30 2010, 05:44 AM:name=spellman23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (spellman23 @ Jan 30 2010, 05:44 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1749781"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You know what DRM it has? CD Key. =]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually it's that exact reason I'm happy to cope with whatever ###### Steam throws at me. Having to constantly swap CDs and try not to go insane over the constant disc humming is quite possibly the worst hassle of any DRM I can personally imagine.
Well, besides whatever Codemasters did to Dirt 2 that prevents me from even playing it.
Piracy costs companies money yes, but adding in things to try and stop it doesn't work, because people just hack them out and release a slightly broken version of the game for free, but as it's for free it doesn't matter if it's slightly broken. You'll accept the occasional hang from something you downloaded for free but not from something you paid 40 quid for.
To be honest I think the best way to counteract piracy is to offer useful benefits which can only be done with a legitimate copy. Like steam, steam lets me use a unified account and chat system in any official steam game as well as web access through the overlay which can be invaluable in games which don't support windowed mode. It lets me play without disks, and it lets me quickly reinstall things when I change computers without having to enter a million CD keys. I deliberately buy things on steam because I like the extra stuff it does. I only buy retail if it's cheaper or if it already integrates with steam anyway like dawn of war 2. Valve on the other hand gets a functional DRM system.
Having DRM which can only exist to cause problems in the game is pointless, because it <i>will</i> get removed and it <i>will</i> annoy anyone who buys legit and therefore leaves it in the game.
<!--quoteo(post=1749748:date=Jan 29 2010, 10:15 PM:name=Syriquez)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Syriquez @ Jan 29 2010, 10:15 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1749748"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Stardock's method is support authentication. The game is perfectly playable and totally functional without special interaction beyond "install". Where support authentication comes in is that in order to get the updates and additional content, you have to go through their online system. It's similar to what BioWare has done after learning Mass Effect's DRM on the PC version was a massive headache. "Want the expanded content and support? Well, you have to sign into our system."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not hugely fond of that system myself, I don't want to have to sign into some horrible company website and enter three differend codes and download a few hundred megs of data and install 3 patches just to get all the game content, it's just hassle, hell I played ME2 all the way through without the extra content because I coudln't be arsed doing the stupid login crap.
I agree here too. The only reason I even got it was the game was taking forever to decrypt and someone warned me I had to download it. And I find this argument holds little water, as the cracked copies of ME2 contained all the DLC in one nice, easy download. Why can't Steam tell I ordered it all and just download it all at once too? It was more hassle for me, having bought the game.
That only applies to games like TFT2. I've used offline mode recently, at least for every single player valve game it works great, I can't remember having trouble with any game specifically, but at the same time I didn't really try every game I own.
That's the fun part: Steam can do that - that is, it pretty much exists for the sole reason of not worrying about patches/DLC - EA just couldn't be arsed with that. Which is, I'm sure, a huge surprise to everyone.
It's kind of ironic, really. Piracy will always be more convenient, regardless of DRM, DLC, patches, or anything else... It's free.
Pretty stupid statement to make. Those who cannot afford the luxury of purchasing video games aside, convenience has nothing to do with price. Piracy may be more convenient when the game is released early, circumvents DRM, or when used to 'demo' the game but most gamers I know don't mind dropping $50 on a title. Speaking of demos, ever notice how PC games get screwed on them?
What.
<!--quoteo(post=1750395:date=Feb 3 2010, 01:41 AM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Feb 3 2010, 01:41 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1750395"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Speaking of demos, ever notice how PC games get screwed on them?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
PC market is pretty much the under-dog of the industry today, mostly due to development hardships and... Oh yeah. Piracy.
All of the latest DLC for EA games has required you not to simply buy it and install it, or even authenticate via Steam, but to use an EA account. Dragon Age and Mass Effect have both used this system, not to mention Battlefield Heroes which requires a mandatory login. EA uses all this data to improve the game, to better tailor their marketing to their core customers and to collect sales data. Steam does the same thing, apart from Steam also offers a service, but the EA account offers nothing to you, it's completely self-serving. That's my reason for not getting the armour freebie codes that came with Dragon Age. I'm glad my flatmate got ME2 on the 360 and got the EA account setup or I wouldn't have had access to the free DLC character (or the explore the crashsite mission which apparently is pointless).
For PC games piracy's only impact on sales is due to people not buying games due to:
Not being able to resell a game when finished due to draconian DRM restrictions that eliminate reselling (so people can't sell their old games to buy new, which console gamers can do).
Lack of demos for games (no, I'm not buying a demoless game for more than 10 bucks, because once it sucks you can't get a refund).
Draconian DRM measures which make playing the game a chore, such as required online authentication for single player games, disc in drive requirements, etc.
Releasing unfinished games that require a patch within a month to fix basic issues.
Making a PC game with console limitations to avoid having to map different controls. The Batman Arkham Asylum demo on the PC sucks to play without a console controller, not to mention it would rotate constantly if a joystick was plugged in like America's Army 3 did, but unlike AA3 there was no way to turn the joystick input off...
I primarily play modifications of games or older games that are done patching because I avoid most of these issues, and I will know which ones are going to be enjoyable to play because there will be plenty of reviews with qualiy feedback instead of just game magazine reviews. I was looking forward to Spore, waited a month and found out the game was completely unlike what they had talked about doing so I didn't buy it. Despite the large amount of piracy reported for that game it still sold well: <a href="http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3170143" target="_blank">http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3170143</a>
They can cry in their tea all they want about 'lost sales' due to piracy but they only have themselves to blame for people not giving them money. The people who pirate because they can't afford or won't spend money on a particular title aren't lost sales because they wouldn't have bought it anyway.
While you bring up all very fair and glaring points... They still lose money they wouldn't have lost on consoles.
The equation of piracy to lost sales is asinine as there's no way to distinguish lost sales from sales you wouldn't make anyway, but this is the same reason you can't reverse the argument.
The equation of piracy to lost sales is asinine as there's no way to distinguish lost sales from sales you wouldn't make anyway, but this is the same reason you can't reverse the argument.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why is there an assumption that any sales are lost at all? The presumes that there is a guaranteed number of sales.
Let's take the Battlefield series with some made up numbers:
Battlefield 1942 - 300,000
Battlefield Vietnam - 400,000
Battlefield 2 - 1.2 million
Battlefield 2142 - 800,000
Does the lower sales for 2142 mean that the game lost sales? Maybe people didn't like the futuristic setting or the in game advertisements. Maybe people bought BF2 for one of the various modern warfare mods that came out for it like Project Reality or Point of Existence when they wouldn't have bought the game anyway.
Let's say all four were pirated 500,000 times each. What number of those 500,000 are 'lost sales'? What if the person would never have purchased the game, even though they pirated it? What if all 500,000 pirates for BF 2142 only bought the game because they pirated it and saw it was worth buying?
The simple fact is people who are willing to pay money for something sold at retail will. Some people are cheap and will use something for free that they wouldn't anyway. Some people will only pay if someone make them, but they will be a small percentage of the people and you can't count them as last sales because they wouldn't have paid for it anyway.
Heck, I'm a BF2 pirate because I purchased BF2, registered my key and the DRM protection killed by CD player. Only that disc had problems reading (it's DRM related, they put errors on the disc to make it hard to copy) so it would stop and start repeatedly to verify the disc was valid. Only this disc had issues. So what I did was download a master copy of the disc, loaded it on a virtual drive to use with my original installation for verification and played that way. After a while I stopped playing so I had to download that copy again, and later I got a min-disc version before EA finally removed the disc check in the last patch.
So I downloaded 3 pirated copies of a game that I purchased just to be able to play it because the publisher added crappy DRM measures. That's right, my valid installation involved three pirated downloads which they claim is a lost sale. Sure it is an anecdote, but it is a good example of why counting 'downloads' as piracy is simply ridiculous.
Games can still be pirated for consoles, due to being able to resell the original game or being able to borrow it from a friend means most people don't bother. The lack of DRM impediments to console gaming is why their piracy is lower.
Anecdotally, I'm one of those frugal gamers. I rarely buy anything unless I'm sure I will enjoy it. I have only pre-ordered 3 games. Orange Box, L4D, and L4D2. The rest have been bought in package deals, sales, or after all my friends start hating me for not being able to talk about spoilers around me (i.e. the game was more popular than God, and for good reason).
I have also bought games specifically for mods. I bought the Civ4 pack simply to play Fall From Heaven. I almost bought the Crysis pack this last winter just to prepare for Mechwarrior Living Legends release.
Does that mean that any game downloaded is then a lost sale? Probably not. If anything, for me at least, a downloaded game is a potential sale. If I enjoy it enough, I will buy it. This actually occured for Psychonauts. I did a quick 24 hour trial on a friend's cracked copy, enjoyed it immensely, so I bought it on Steam. Yeah, I had to crack it to play it on my machine. I also have had a similar experience to snooggums where I had a perfectly valid purchased game, but the CD key provided was broken. I have no idea why (this was a Rollercoaster Tycoon game). So I nabbed myself a keygen and cracked my store bought copy.
So sure, I'm a minority. I know several people who never pay for their games. I know people who are quite religious about paying for every game. I also know some people with so much disposable income they don't care and just buy all of Steam (seriously, and he's a grad student and has over 60 hours logged just on Mass Effect 2).
Just my viewpoint.
Piracy reduces the amount of money people are willing to pay for a game, because there's always a free alternative. Market where people are allowed to set the price they pay rarely works.
There are quite a few vicious circles with piracy. For example companies are unwilling to publish demos because they apparently help cracking the game. Then again people argue that the lack of demos encourages piracy.
Bad DRM is still bad DRM, but I can't see it justifying pre-emptive pirating before you run into troublesome DRM in a specific game.
*Cough*
Thats exactly how a free market is supposed to work!
However, when only looking at a single game you have a classic monopoly situation, because only 1 publisher is offering a certain product. This in return means, that you would need to assume that every video game is the same and then look at the market as a whole. Now you have lots of people offering a single product and lots of people willing to buy.
The amount of money the average consumer is willing to pay, will dictate the price!
Isn't it more like the manufacturer sets the price and people decide whether they pay for it? I can't see people paying 5$ for cars being basis for any stable economical structure.
Or am I missing something completely obvious here?
Huh?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->PC market is pretty much the under-dog of the industry today, mostly due to development hardships and... Oh yeah. Piracy.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And that justifies not releasing demos because...? I'm not saying you're trying to justify it but if that's what game publishers are thinking when they don't release demos then it's pretty clear to see how that's a contributing factor to piracy.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->While you bring up all very fair and glaring points... They still lose money they wouldn't have lost on consoles.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Money lost on consoles is just far harder to track. Walk into a gamestop / eb games / babbages. See how 80% of the store is covered in used games? That's equivalent to piracy on the PC but is far harder to trace compared to looking at how many times a torrent has been downloaded. More traditional forms of piracy still exist on consoles as we recently saw <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/11/12/cnet.xbox.live.ban/index.html" target="_blank">1 million xbox users</a> get banned for modifying their consoles.
Usually your posts don't suck, Draco, but you're way off the ball on this one.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I thought demos had just disappeared entirely. Is it only PC demos or what?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah dude, basically PC only. I was <i>shocked</i> when I recently bought my PS3 and found that nearly <i>every</i> game available has a demo, often released before the release date of the game. It's cool knowing how a game plays before buying it.
Well, plus whoring off reviews from friends/borrowing.
Anyone else got massive disagreement with most magazine reviews nowadays? I guess it's about finding one reliable source (friends?) and sticking with it, but still it I just don't feel like trusting reviews easily. Take Black & White for example, it has still got 90/100 in metacritic despite the game having so many massive flaws after you've shrugged off the first amazement.