"Always On" DRM Idea gets more publishers.

[Fourstaff]

Whats the big deal with having an internet connection and an online key server to play the game ?
This works for online shooter games like a charm..

Not everyone in the world have internet access all the time you know. And if you play through online, your ping gets to ~100ms. In LAN, ping averages lower than 20ms.

 

[1Kurgan1]

3 pages in 1 day, don't really want to read this all, lol. Either way, I'm not quite sure what the point of this is, especially with console security compromised on everything but the PS3 long ago. What the heck are they going to do about that? And those pirated games can even be played online since they don't have thing to identify that each one is unique.

 

[digibucc]

and then comes the classic question... if piracy is the reason for crazy prices and the lengths publishers go to to make money - why is the ps3 treated by them just like every other console?

the fact that the ps3 is impossible to pirate should mean that we see lower prices for their games- if the prices were really dependent on piracy. but as you can see they are not. corporations will do everything they can to squeeze every last penny out of us - whether they have a justifiable reason to or not.

there is no possible way that high prices, "skate online accounts" and paid "cerberus network accounts" have anything to do with piracy. companies may feel they are losing money on secondhand games - but even if that is a valid concern , they do not have the right to jack up prices.

they may have the ability - and it may be their decision , but it is in no way "right" and I cannot fathom how anyone could defend these people.
i wish there were a way to tell for sure - as I would bet substantially that piracy barely affects a companies bottom line. the majority of people who WOULD have bought a game will end up buying it anyway.

heck - after I finally got a good job , I went back and bought a crapload of PC, & console games that I had previously pirated. I enjoyed them for a time and even though I will most likely never play them again I wanted to pay for the enjoyment I did get. now granted not every "reformed" pirate will do that. but the fact of the matter is th4ese companies got hundreds of dollars from me that they never would have gotten otherwise - because of piracy. If i did not play the game a fair amount and feel bad about playing it for free , i never would have came back years later and paid for a game with crappy graphics compared to current gen. it would have been one more game i never got a chance to play. but instead I played it, even though i couldn't afford it (food was more important at the time) and then i paid for it afterward.

I think my point is there is a lot of gray area, there are a lot of variables. there are a lot of very specific, very important pieces of information that are impossible for us to know. so in recognizing that, taking any kind of a hard stance is ridiculous. yes pirates are bad - but what the companies are doing is bad too! so because there are people out there that pirate - you defend and think it is ok for corporations o go as far as they do? that's insanity! just because there is a cause doesn't mean the effect is justified.

 

[niko084]

so its theft in practice but "copyright infringement" when its time for the claims to be filed....

I vote this thread just gets deleted cause this is never going to end and nothing good is going to come out of it...but hey thats just me

The law on theft specifies "physical tangible property" in many areas.
Therefore they required a new law.

Does it really matter what they call it?
Does it matter if blue was called green instead?

You are nit picking a entirely useless point.

I can't personally say that activation bothers me, limited installs... Wont buy it, always on, wont buy it.. Bluray, wont buy it.

Pick your battles and draw your lines.

 

[Gzero]

and then comes the classic question... if piracy is the reason for crazy prices and the lengths publishers go to to make money - why is the ps3 treated by them just like every other console?

the fact that the ps3 is impossible to pirate should mean that we see lower prices for their games- if the prices were really dependent on piracy. but as you can see they are not. corporations will do everything they can to squeeze every last penny out of us - whether they have a justifiable reason to or not.

there is no possible way that high prices, "skate online accounts" and paid "cerberus network accounts" have anything to do with piracy. companies may feel they are losing money on secondhand games - but even if that is a valid concern , they do not have the right to jack up prices.

they may have the ability - and it may be their decision , but it is in no way "right" and I cannot fathom how anyone could defend these people.
i wish there were a way to tell for sure - as I would bet substantially that piracy barely affects a companies bottom line. the majority of people who WOULD have bought a game will end up buying it anyway.

heck - after I finally got a good job , I went back and bought a crapload of PC, & console games that I had previously pirated. I enjoyed them for a time and even though I will most likely never play them again I wanted to pay for the enjoyment I did get. now granted not every "reformed" pirate will do that. but the fact of the matter is th4ese companies got hundreds of dollars from me that they never would have gotten otherwise - because of piracy. If i did not play the game a fair amount and feel bad about playing it for free , i never would have came back years later and paid for a game with crappy graphics compared to current gen. it would have been one more game i never got a chance to play. but instead I played it, even though i couldn't afford it (food was more important at the time) and then i paid for it afterward.

I think my point is there is a lot of gray area, there are a lot of variables. there are a lot of very specific, very important pieces of information that are impossible for us to know. so in recognizing that, taking any kind of a hard stance is ridiculous. yes pirates are bad - but what the companies are doing is bad too! so because there are people out there that pirate - you defend and think it is ok for corporations o go as far as they do? that's insanity! just because there is a cause doesn't mean the effect is justified.

I like how the others will ignore the goods points you have made.

For those that don't get it:

Publisher Consumer + Developers.

I did buy World of Goo and gave money to charity during that special indie promotion (the majority though went to the devs).

 

[wahdangun]

and then comes the classic question... if piracy is the reason for crazy prices and the lengths publishers go to to make money - why is the ps3 treated by them just like every other console?

the fact that the ps3 is impossible to pirate should mean that we see lower prices for their games- if the prices were really dependent on piracy. but as you can see they are not. corporations will do everything they can to squeeze every last penny out of us - whether they have a justifiable reason to or not.

there is no possible way that high prices, "skate online accounts" and paid "cerberus network accounts" have anything to do with piracy. companies may feel they are losing money on secondhand games - but even if that is a valid concern , they do not have the right to jack up prices.

they may have the ability - and it may be their decision , but it is in no way "right" and I cannot fathom how anyone could defend these people.
i wish there were a way to tell for sure - as I would bet substantially that piracy barely affects a companies bottom line. the majority of people who WOULD have bought a game will end up buying it anyway.

heck - after I finally got a good job , I went back and bought a crapload of PC, & console games that I had previously pirated. I enjoyed them for a time and even though I will most likely never play them again I wanted to pay for the enjoyment I did get. now granted not every "reformed" pirate will do that. but the fact of the matter is th4ese companies got hundreds of dollars from me that they never would have gotten otherwise - because of piracy. If i did not play the game a fair amount and feel bad about playing it for free , i never would have came back years later and paid for a game with crappy graphics compared to current gen. it would have been one more game i never got a chance to play. but instead I played it, even though i couldn't afford it (food was more important at the time) and then i paid for it afterward.

I think my point is there is a lot of gray area, there are a lot of variables. there are a lot of very specific, very important pieces of information that are impossible for us to know. so in recognizing that, taking any kind of a hard stance is ridiculous. yes pirates are bad - but what the companies are doing is bad too! so because there are people out there that pirate - you defend and think it is ok for corporations o go as far as they do? that's insanity! just because there is a cause doesn't mean the effect is justified.

hey i never support this kind of DRM, but i just saying that pirate was one of the real problem we have, maybe its because we have too much bandwith in our hand and it encourage people to easy pirate. just look at stardock they commitment not to use any short of DRM in their game, and you know what only 30 % use legit copy, im feel sorry of them.

and btw the game price it's not because of piracy but because off fee, you must know that if developer want to build a console game they must pay some short of royalty to console maker, and thats why us PC gamer usually have lower price and on top of that PS3 blue-ray media have higher price than standard dvd and because of the burner/reader was also expensive its not economical for pirate to pirate PS3 games and thats the only reason and not just because its impossible because there are no damm thing that can't be crack-able


edit: btw if majority of people like you it will be wonderfull world but its not the case here, people want free stuff if they can get it(without getting busted).

 

[DrPepper]

do you know what that only 30% who buy and play legit copy of it.

h just look at stardock they commitment not to use any short of DRM in their game, and you know what only 30 % use legit copy, im feel sorry of them.

There is absolutely no proof for those claims.

 

[digibucc]

hey i never support this kind of DRM, but i just saying that pirate was one of the real problem we have, maybe its because we have too much bandwith in our hand and it encourage people to easy pirate. just look at stardock they commitment not to use any short of DRM in their game, and you know what only 30 % use legit copy, im feel sorry of them.

me too - that's why gal civ 1 & 2 and sins , as well as object desktop were all products i purchased after i had gotten my use out of pirated versions YEARS AGO. I finally got a job and made money - and paid for them even though i have never played the game once (since purchase) - and haven't used object desktop in months...

and btw the game price it's not because of piracy

that's my point.

but because off fee, you must know that if developer want to build a console game they must pay some short of royalty to console maker, and thats why us PC gamer usually have lower price

except with PS3 sony funds 95% of the games themselves, as well as owning the proprietary blu-ray technology the discs are used for! do you think sony charges their studios retail or even stock cost on those? of course not! Sony's setup with the PS3 is different from any other console in that they have a lock on everything in their market. they make all that $$$ from everything else - with a small loss on hardware. with 360 you'd be right , but PS3 is different. that's why it is a perfect example.

and on top of that PS3 blue-ray media have higher price than standard dvd and because of the burner/reader was also expensive its not economical for pirate to pirate PS3 games and thats the only reason and not just because its imposible because there are no damm thing that can't be crack-able

well yes that would also be a hurdle to get over - but A) they have to crack it first! it's been years and no one is close! of course it's not "uncrackable" but the resources necessary and the outcome achieved make it NOT WORTH IT! and B) either way it still has NO PIRACY! if piracy really affected sales the way these companies claim they do we should see a difference with the PS3!

 

[douglatins]

If it has DRM, I'll pirate it. If it doesn't have DRM, I'll pirate it the day it is released.

He is saying what happens sometimes... But if a DRM that cripples original buyers and only makes pirates wait a while to play it... i say its a losing game

LOL i see 2 house lovers here

 

[newtekie1]

hey no one force you to buy the game, if you think game was suck don't buy it and don't pirate it,

game is work of art you know, so people have different taste and maybe your taste is different from what game studio want.

a

Correct, no one is forcing me to buy the game, which is why I choose to pirate it instead.

I see this statement alot, at least twice in this thread so far and I only did a quick skim of it, I think I even skipped an entire page. It doesn't make any sense, and it makes the anti-pirate argument looks stupid. Here, I'll help your side out a little bit here.

I think the word you are looking for is "play" not "buy". No one is forcing me to play the game. See doesn't that make more sense? If you use "buy", obviously I'm not buying the game, I'm pirating it, so it makes no sense to say no one is forcing me to do something I'm not doing.

Now, lets assume you said "No one is forcing you to play the game." A far better argument indeed. You are right, no one is forcing me to play the game. So, if the game sucks, I don't play it. Yes, I downloaded it illegally. But if I download it illegally, play it for an hour and realize it sucks, uninstall it, and delete the downloaded content, is it still piracy?

Yes, to the game publishers and developers it certainly is! Why? Becuase they didn't make any money off me. See if I didn't pirate the game, I would have had to actually buy it to try it. Then when I find out it sucks, and I just wasted my $60, I can't even take the game back because the Publishes have implemented stupid rules about returning open software, or rather they flat out said you can't.

I remember before that policy, returning several games within the 14 day period for the simple reason that they sucked. That used to be acceptable, the store would take the game back, and you would get your money back. And guess what, Publishers actually had to put out games that didn't suck. Not anymore though, the publishers won't take games back from the stores if they've been openned, so now the consumer is stuck with shit games that they've wasted their money on. I feel sorry for kids today, I actually really do. I remember saving and saving, mowing lawns and doing chores for people around the neighborhood when I was 12, so I could go to Software Etc.(yes, I'm dating myself here.) and buy a game. I also remember getting home and finding out that game sucked, packing it back up, and taking it back. You can't do that anymore.

Ok, now I know the next argument will be "well they do have demos". Yes, they do. But more often then not, the demo is an extremely small section of the game, usually the best part of the game, that doesn't give a real idea of how the real game will be. And it seems to be even more popular then ever for Publishers and Developers to not release a demo at all. There are some really great exceptions to this. Steam free weekends, where they just let you play the game, the complete game, for an entire weekend free. That is a great idea, and I applaud Steam for implementing it. However, it is far too rare, and usually not with brand new games. Now, if game developers and publishers released demos, that were the full game, but time limitted to say 4 hours of gametime before shutting off and requiring purchase, I probably wouldn't pirate a single game. The 4 hours of play would be more than enough for me to figure out if I liked the game or not, and if I was going to buy it or not.

Oh, and on a different note. I'd like to point out that piracy is not theft. A handy guide to explain:

Anyone that says piracy if theft should be out in front of their local library with picket signs, because they freely allow people, even aid them in, taking books to the copier and photocopying pages! Hell some librarys even have litte kiosks that you you scan pages directly onto a flash drive!

Anti-pirate people like to make the argument "You wouldn't walk into a store and steal a stick of RAM, but you would steal software." No you idiots, I wouldn't walk into Target and steal a book, but I would walk into a library and make a photocopy of every page I needed, or even better scan every page of the book onto a flash drive!

 

[Fourstaff]

We need less shitty games in order to get people to buy them. The only good "new" game I have played this year is Demon's Souls. And the no return policy is nonsense, if you don't like your product you should have all the right to return the product citing unfit for "consumption". Someone should slap them with a class action lawsuit for removing that right.

 

[digibucc]

That used to be acceptable, the store would take the game back, and you would get your money back. And guess what, Publishers actually had to put out games that didn't suck. Not anymore though, the publishers won't take games back from the stores if they've been openned, so now the consumer is stuck with shit games that they've wasted their money on.

exactly.

i don't argue there isn't piracy - i don't argue that companies may lose an amount of money from it (albeit relatively small i believe)

what i say is the companies exaggerate the problem in order to have an excuse to put restrictions on regular free market policy. they have a created a product that operates under different laws from anything else , and consumers are given the shaft and expected to deal with it.

under the guise of "protecting" these multi-billion dollar entities who continually bring in RECORD PROFITS, they get to lock up the market and squeeze out even more.

just because there is piracy, doesn't mean it is the core source of the problem. companies over-charge and lock up the market - that's WHY piracy is so prevalent.

 

[douglatins]

Correct, no one is forcing me to buy the game, which is why I choose to pirate it instead.

I see this statement alot, at least twice in this thread so far and I only did a quick skim of it, I think I even skipped an entire page. It doesn't make any sense, and it makes the anti-pirate argument looks stupid. Here, I'll help your side out a little bit here.

I think the word you are looking for is "play" not "buy". No one is forcing me to play the game. See doesn't that make more sense? If you use "buy", obviously I'm not buying the game, I'm pirating it, so it makes no sense to say no one is forcing me to do something I'm not doing.

Now, lets assume you said "No one is forcing you to play the game." A far better argument indeed. You are right, no one is forcing me to play the game. So, if the game sucks, I don't play it. Yes, I downloaded it illegally. But if I download it illegally, play it for an hour and realize it sucks, uninstall it, and delete the downloaded content, is it still piracy?

Yes, to the game publishers and developers it certainly is! Why? Becuase they didn't make any money off me. See if I didn't pirate the game, I would have had to actually buy it to try it. Then when I find out it sucks, and I just wasted my $60, I can't even take the game back because the Publishes have implemented stupid rules about returning open software, or rather they flat out said you can't.

I remember before that policy, returning several games within the 14 day period for the simple reason that they sucked. That used to be acceptable, the store would take the game back, and you would get your money back. And guess what, Publishers actually had to put out games that didn't suck. Not anymore though, the publishers won't take games back from the stores if they've been openned, so now the consumer is stuck with shit games that they've wasted their money on. I feel sorry for kids today, I actually really do. I remember saving and saving, mowing lawns and doing chores for people around the neighborhood when I was 12, so I could go to Software Etc.(yes, I'm dating myself here.) and buy a game. I also remember getting home and finding out that game sucked, packing it back up, and taking it back. You can't do that anymore.

Ok, now I know the next argument will be "well they do have demos". Yes, they do. But more often then not, the demo is an extremely small section of the game, usually the best part of the game, that doesn't give a real idea of how the real game will be. And it seems to be even more popular then ever for Publishers and Developers to not release a demo at all. There are some really great exceptions to this. Steam free weekends, where they just let you play the game, the complete game, for an entire weekend free. That is a great idea, and I applaud Steam for implementing it. However, it is far too rare, and usually not with brand new games. Now, if game developers and publishers released demos, that were the full game, but time limitted to say 4 hours of gametime before shutting off and requiring purchase, I probably wouldn't pirate a single game. The 4 hours of play would be more than enough for me to figure out if I liked the game or not, and if I was going to buy it or not.

Oh, and on a different note. I'd like to point out that piracy is not theft. A handy guide to explain:
http://www.gameproducer.net/images/piracyisnottheft.jpg

Anyone that says piracy if theft should be out in front of their local library with picket signs, because they freely allow people, even aid them in, taking books to the copier and photocopying pages! Hell some librarys even have litte kiosks that you you scan pages directly onto a flash drive!

Anti-pirate people like to make the argument "You wouldn't walk into a store and steal a stick of RAM, but you would steal software." No you idiots, I wouldn't walk into Target and steal a book, but I would walk into a library and make a photocopy of every page I needed, or even better scan every page of the book onto a flash drive!

Dude i totally freaking agree with you.

That`s a good statement, not being able to return a game is stupid, they deserve any bad things that come out of it, like more piracy and such, though I would see people renting games for free right?

 

[Fourstaff]

Games are overpriced, so lets do some math:

A new game costs $50-$60
5770 costs $150.
I can feed my self for a week with $50 (ok fine, not very well, but can be done)
I can get a new mouse/keyboard
I can hire a prostitute for a longer lasting enjoyment

Do I need to say more?

 

[driver66]

. The 4 hours of play would be more than enough time for me to beat the game.

Fixed for ya

 

[Suijin]

I have come to hate DRM. The biggest point being I don't want to have to carry every DVD/CD of a game with me if I should want to play that one on my laptop, or have an internet connection everywhere.

I don't solve this with pirating, I just don't buy those games.

Stardock has become my new favorite, no DRM. If nothing else I am rewarding a company who doesn't have their head stuck up their nether regions. DRM seems to hurt legitamate customers much more than pirates.

A lot of the lost sales of PC games have went to MMOs rather than pirates (I mean pirates weren't likely to buy it anyway). They don't seem to include MMO subs in the sales of PC games that I have saw.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I remember before that policy, returning several games within the 14 day period for the simple reason that they sucked. That used to be acceptable, the store would take the game back, and you would get your money back. And guess what, Publishers actually had to put out games that didn't suck. Not anymore though, the publishers won't take games back from the stores if they've been openned, so now the consumer is stuck with shit games that they've wasted their money on. I feel sorry for kids today, I actually really do. I remember saving and saving, mowing lawns and doing chores for people around the neighborhood when I was 12, so I could go to Software Etc.(yes, I'm dating myself here.) and buy a game. I also remember getting home and finding out that game sucked, packing it back up, and taking it back. You can't do that anymore.

What started the no-returns policy was the introduction of installers requiring serial keys before installing (amplified by the serial key being required, and unique, to play online). Between about 1997 and 2002, the market migrated from consumer product based (something that sits on the shelf--like a book) to serial key based. That is, you no longer buy a consumer product, you buy a serial key which entitles you to install and use the software.

Ehm, that little 16-25 digit number is virtually all you own anymore and even that is subject to being revoked. Basically, you own nothing. You have no viable product to return, you have no viable product to sell, you have zero rights except to use* the software.

* With a laundry list of limitations.


I'll be honest: I don't want to buy games anymore. It feels like funding a domestic terror cell.

 

[digibucc]

Fixed for ya

i'm sorry, are you saying four hours of play costing $60 USD is in any way justifiable?

 

[DrPepper]

What started the no-returns policy was the introduction of installers requiring serial keys before installing. Over the past 15 years or so, the market migrated from consumer product based (something that sites on the shelf--like a book) to serial key based. That is, you no longer buy a consumer product, you by a serial key which entitles you to install and use the software.

Ehm, that little 16-25 digit number is virtually all you own anymore and even that is subject to being revoked. Basically, you own nothing. You have no viable product to return, you have no viable product to sell, you have zero rights except to use* the software.

* With a laundry list of limitations.


I'll be honest: I don't want to buy games anymore. It feels like funding a domestic terror cell.

Agree'd buying a game somehow instantly means the consumer liked the game.

Just reinstalled it and got the key is already in use,wtf so i threw the pos in the trash.

Dont matter now,its in the trash and staying there fecking stupid crap.What a waste of £35.

 

[lyndonguitar]

no matter what the DRM is, piracy always wins. Even steam got pirated. with an uber secure(crappy) DRM, you could only delay the piracy.

customers are the ones who are really getting hurt by this DRM crap

 

[lyndonguitar]

i'm sorry, are you saying four hours of play costing $60 USD is in any way justifiable?

i'd rather watch a movie.

i would pay 60$ for a game that has a great replay value and really worth the money.
Like Oblivion, The Sims 3, Grand Theft Auto, Mass Effect, Half Life(Mods), Dragon Age and other high rated games out there.

imagine buying a 60$ game and finishing it in less than 6 hours and has no multiplayer/replayability. :shadedshu

EDIT: oops sorry double post.

 

[driver66]

i'm sorry, are you saying four hours of play costing $60 USD is in any way justifiable?

I am saying quite the opposite ............. That really isn't worth the time to download is it?

 

[lyndonguitar]

I am saying quite the opposite ............. That really isn't worth the time to download is it?

at least its "free" to try it out.

 

[Kreij]

It's really pretty simple. If you don't like the DRM, don't buy the game.

Alternatively, buy games from Impulse. No internet connection needed to play them.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Alternatively, buy games from Impulse. No internet connection needed to play them.

But the same problem: you literally own nothing--even less with digital distribution.