A developer who doesn't blame pirates for a change

[TheVrolok]

I'm actually going to buy Sins simply because of this article. I hope I'm not disappointed!

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Regs

Originally posted by: Specop 007
And this hits the nail RIGHT on the head.

"The reason why we don't put copy protection on our games isn't because we're nice guys. We do it because the people who actually buy games don't like to mess with it. Our customers make the rules, not the pirates. Pirates don't count. We know our customers could pirate our games if they want but choose to support our efforts. So we return the favor - we make the games they want and deliver them how they want it. This is also known as operating like every other industry outside the PC game industry."

The reason why major publishers use bloated or sometimes malicious copy protection is because of their over-extended chain of command and their lack of communication with each other. Smaller publishing and developer firms have the liberty of specialization and minimal over head and over sight.

Basically Mr.CEO of large company asks "how can we improve profit margins?". Then the financial advisor mentions piracy as being one factor (of many factors). This problem gets handed (delegated) to the director of operations. Operations says, " well we can contract with these anti-piracy firms to make special software for us". Problem is being addressed, Mr..CEO is happy.

So now that the CEO is off the middle-mans back, they don't care until there is enough public out cry about the product the CEO would step in and say "your solution did not work, so don't blame me" bit.

I believe the author of this article is spoiled by the luxury of having a job in a smaller firm.

That's not the consumers problem. Just as with the RIAA and MPAA, the customer will be better off if the behemoth media conglomerates die off and leave the industry to smaller companies that actually care about their customers.

 

[cdmccool]

Originally posted by: TheVrolok
I'm actually going to buy Sins simply because of this article. I hope I'm not disappointed!

I am too.

 

[SViper]

I think he hits the nail on the head when he discusses developers designing games for only a small portion of the market.

My assumption is that there is a normal bell curve for PC hardware. The vast majority of the market will not have the latest and greatest gaming hardware. Why design a game that alienates the majority of users who do not have the best hardware? It doesn't make much sense to me. When you design a product, you want it to be accessible to the most amount of people.

I'll use WoW as an example. I have a fairly old system (Athlon XP 3700+ single core, 7800 GT). I could fire up WoW right now and wouldn't have any problem playing it at all. Hell, I could pull out my 2 year old laptop and play WoW on it.

In my opinion, playability and fun factor should be the main focus of games, not how good it looks. Making a game with the focus of it looking good will only win you a small percentage of the market (according to the article, 15%). I'm not a business major, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that doesn't make much business sense.

 

[batmang]

Originally posted by: Beev
He's pretty much right. Good games don't need DRM. Oblivion had none, still sold like crazy. Companies that use DRM are nothing more than scared their product will suck. I bought Oblivion, I bought Sins. If a game is good, it gets bought, period.

I 100% agree.

 

[IEC]

I'm strongly considering buying Sins of a Solar Empire. I really like Stardock's stance on DRM and piracy. They condemn piracy without blaming it and discard DRM by responding to CUSTOMER demands. They have their business minds in the right place