An open statement to game companies

[PrinceofWands]

After a recent announcement by Ubisoft I wanted to remind you all that since the inception of invasive or irrational DRM systems I have maintained my stance to not play anything you make if you engage in such practices. You turned a once avid game purchaser to other pursuits rather than give you a single dollar of my money. My life is probably better for it; how's yours?

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Check out Ironclad and Stardock's Sins of a Solar Empire. It's essentially DRM free. The only thing you have to do to patch it is download the Impulse program, which you don't to run to play the game, just to patch. It's completely benign.

 

[lupi]

essentially meaning it locks you into an account and unless you create a new account for every single game you own it's tied to you and your account forever as well as requiring the service to be around forever to use.

 

[JujuFish]

Check out Ironclad and Stardock's Sins of a Solar Empire. It's essentially DRM free. The only thing you have to do to patch it is download the Impulse program, which you don't to run to play the game, just to patch. It's completely benign.

Do you ever talk about something besides SoaSE or UT99?

 

[wuliheron]

After a recent announcement by Ubisoft I wanted to remind you all that since the inception of invasive or irrational DRM systems I have maintained my stance to not play anything you make if you engage in such practices. You turned a once avid game purchaser to other pursuits rather than give you a single dollar of my money. My life is probably better for it; how's yours?

I think giving up meat, alcohol, and tobacco would do at least much good.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Do you ever talk about something besides SoaSE or UT99?

No. They are unrivaled games.

 

[PrinceofWands]

I think giving up meat, alcohol, and tobacco would do at least much good.

Well, I've never had any tobacco, so that's moot.

 

[Terzo]

After a recent announcement by Ubisoft I wanted to remind you all that since the inception of invasive or irrational DRM systems I have maintained my stance to not play anything you make if you engage in such practices. You turned a once avid game purchaser to other pursuits rather than give you a single dollar of my money. My life is probably better for it; how's yours?

:thumbsup:

 

[Craig234]

I've never understood the hate of DRM. I know I'm in a small minority. It's never caused me problems that I can recall, and I am in favor of publishers being paid for their products.

If anything, the issue I have is that it doesn't seem to work that well - everything seems to get hacked.

I'm sympathetic to the issue if it causes problems; that's a legitimate reason to avoid a product. But that's not what I see, I see a blanket ideological opposition.

 

[Nintendesert]

I've never understood the hate of DRM. I know I'm in a small minority. It's never caused me problems that I can recall, and I am in favor of publishers being paid for their products.

If anything, the issue I have is that it doesn't seem to work that well - everything seems to get hacked.

I'm sympathetic to the issue if it causes problems; that's a legitimate reason to avoid a product. But that's not what I see, I see a blanket ideological opposition.

DRM gets lumped together, but oh well such is life. STEAM and Impulse are essentially DRM, however they are done right and offer benefits and aren't intrusive.

Sony turns around and adds rootkits, UBISHIT does that always connected or your game doesn't function DRM.

So there are levels of DRM that are acceptable and have been accepted, however these other methods are also very transparent as to what the real goals are. They aren't to stop pirates, they are to stop and kill the resale market. They lose much more money on that then they do to pirates.

DRM is a pretty complicated issue, but one that resonates with players that have DRM issues and feel like the legit customer is treated like a criminal and the actual pirate gets a more hassle free product.

 

[Craig234]

DRM gets lumped together, but oh well such is life. STEAM and Impulse are essentially DRM, however they are done right and offer benefits and aren't intrusive.

Sony turns around and adds rootkits, UBISHIT does that always connected or your game doesn't function DRM.

So there are levels of DRM that are acceptable and have been accepted, however these other methods are also very transparent as to what the real goals are. They aren't to stop pirates, they are to stop and kill the resale market. They lose much more money on that then they do to pirates.

DRM is a pretty complicated issue, but one that resonates with players that have DRM issues and feel like the legit customer is treated like a criminal and the actual pirate gets a more hassle free product.

You make good points in the first part of your post; the last part is rhetoric, 'treat customers like criminals'. Is a movie theatre making you give them a ticket 'treating you like a criminal', because you have to 'prove' you paid and aren't a criminal entering the show for free? Technically, yes, it is - and it makes sense to do it.

 

[Nintendesert]

You make good points in the first part of your post; the last part is rhetoric, 'treat customers like criminals'. Is a movie theatre making you give them a ticket 'treating you like a criminal', because you have to 'prove' you paid and aren't a criminal entering the show for free? Technically, yes, it is - and it makes sense to do it.

It's not my argument against DRM, I was merely stating what some of the more notable arguments against it are.

I buy all of my games through Impulse and STEAM now so the days of dealing with no-cd cracks and all that are behind me. I've accepted the level of DRM I'm ok with and voted with my wallet.

 

[lupi]

You make good points in the first part of your post; the last part is rhetoric, 'treat customers like criminals'. Is a movie theatre making you give them a ticket 'treating you like a criminal', because you have to 'prove' you paid and aren't a criminal entering the show for free? Technically, yes, it is - and it makes sense to do it.

you go into a movie theater realizing that you have a one of oppurtunity to view the movie. you buy your own software title thinking you can run it forever, just a weeeeee bit of a difference.

 

[Nebor]

I've never understood the hate of DRM. I know I'm in a small minority. It's never caused me problems that I can recall, and I am in favor of publishers being paid for their products.

If anything, the issue I have is that it doesn't seem to work that well - everything seems to get hacked.

I'm sympathetic to the issue if it causes problems; that's a legitimate reason to avoid a product. But that's not what I see, I see a blanket ideological opposition.

Agreed. My only complaint is that I wish DRM were more effective. Publishers are still defrauded of millions in revenue every year by pirates. I've never had a problem with DRM, or even really noticed it's presence. So I say crank up the intrusiveness if it gets more money to the people making the games, so that they can make more of them.

 

[Nintendesert]

Agreed. My only complaint is that I wish DRM were more effective. Publishers are still defrauded of millions in revenue every year by pirates. I've never had a problem with DRM, or even really noticed it's presence. So I say crank up the intrusiveness if it gets more money to the people making the games, so that they can make more of them.

🙄

 

[Anarchist420]

Agreed. My only complaint is that I wish DRM were more effective. Publishers are still defrauded of millions in revenue every year by pirates. I've never had a problem with DRM, or even really noticed it's presence. So I say crank up the intrusiveness if it gets more money to the people making the games, so that they can make more of them.

If DRM could be effective, it would've been already. They would make nearly as much money if they sold their games without DRM.

At least that's what I think.

 

[bart1975]

Agreed. My only complaint is that I wish DRM were more effective. Publishers are still defrauded of millions in revenue every year by pirates. I've never had a problem with DRM, or even really noticed it's presence. So I say crank up the intrusiveness if it gets more money to the people making the games, so that they can make more of them.

In reality it does not work that way. People that pirate games have no problems most of the time working around the DRM. In some cases the pirates actually have a more hassle free game play experience while the people that paid for the game must jump through hoops.
As a former eye patch wearer myself this was nullified by F2P games which I play exclusively now. F2P plus micro transactions could in theory wipe out piracy all together.

 

[ImpulsE69]

The distribution and pricing of gaming is going through an evolution right now. Old arguments are no longer valid.

I don't see most of todays DRM to be like the DRM of old. Sure they want to eliminate resale (which they've got a good start on), but remember much of that comes at a cost. When you can buy a $50 game for $10 a few months after it comes out, it really sways your decision to purchase said game.

That same game in the store might only get discounted $10 if at all in that amount of time. When you can wait 6 months and buy that same game for $5, vs still the same $40, you are willing to up with that much more. The one ones getting screwed are the preorders and people who actually buy digital games at retail prices. Sorry, it's just well..not economically smart.

(note the prices above are just for example, we all know YMMV)

The Piracy argument is old and outdated as well. DRM does almost nothing to stop piracy. In fact most pirates can play those same games prior to when you can even play yours.

 

[PrinceofWands]

I've never understood the hate of DRM. I know I'm in a small minority. It's never caused me problems that I can recall, and I am in favor of publishers being paid for their products.

If anything, the issue I have is that it doesn't seem to work that well - everything seems to get hacked.

I'm sympathetic to the issue if it causes problems; that's a legitimate reason to avoid a product. But that's not what I see, I see a blanket ideological opposition.

I have had problems, as have others I know. More than that, however, is the ideological opposition. I DETEST everything about the practice, so even if I'd never suffered (or never would) I would still oppose it.

A good portion of the 'piracy' is actually people doing what they have to in order to break the DRM alone. It started back in the early days with cd-check crackers, which were just as often about convenience as actual piracy. I know I personally have always refused to put my cds in, as it's an unnecessary step. Now you get all sorts of reporting issues and checks that require more advanced cracks. Often the end result is the inability to download content you deserve access to, or other issues which necessitate using illegal sources to circumvent.

The other consideration is costs. Yes, I realize that production costs are higher, and the end result more spectacular, but it's not in-line with earnings. Most of the country simply can't afford the rising prices. That means they're not going to purchase a game no matter what - they simply don't have the money. Therefore the piracy isn't impacting anyone, except by creating fans of a product that may (if workers ever get paid again) lead to honest purchases.

Study after study shows that no form of piracy has significant negative impacts. It's really all just about control, and profits for ancillary groups (like the RIAA) that contribute nothing while causing great harms.

 

[PrinceofWands]

DRM gets lumped together, but oh well such is life. STEAM and Impulse are essentially DRM, however they are done right and offer benefits and aren't intrusive.

Sony turns around and adds rootkits, UBISHIT does that always connected or your game doesn't function DRM.

So there are levels of DRM that are acceptable and have been accepted, however these other methods are also very transparent as to what the real goals are. They aren't to stop pirates, they are to stop and kill the resale market. They lose much more money on that then they do to pirates.

DRM is a pretty complicated issue, but one that resonates with players that have DRM issues and feel like the legit customer is treated like a criminal and the actual pirate gets a more hassle free product.

I just want to mention that while I'm in a minority, I lump steam and all forms of online 'facilitators' as DRM. I refuse to use any of them for many of the same reasons that I avoid other forms of attempted control over consumers. When I buy something, it's mine - period. I do anything I want, any way I want, and that's all there is to it. I care not one whit for who blew who to get some fascist ruling about EULAs or anything else. When I buy something I get physical control over it, and won't allow anyone else to control if or how I access it.

 

[Nebor]

I just want to mention that while I'm in a minority, I lump steam and all forms of online 'facilitators' as DRM. I refuse to use any of them for many of the same reasons that I avoid other forms of attempted control over consumers. When I buy something, it's mine - period. I do anything I want, any way I want, and that's all there is to it. I care not one whit for who blew who to get some fascist ruling about EULAs or anything else. When I buy something I get physical control over it, and won't allow anyone else to control if or how I access it.

Seems like that would limit the games you can play. And it'll only get worse with more Steam and now Origin exclusives on the way.

 

[Kristijonas]

Perhaps a good way is to pirate games. I know people who pirate a game only to buy 3 or 5 copies later (!) to support the company. I hope in the future computer games will be considered art and everyone will be able to "donate" to the titles they support. I'm sure some games would get even more $ this way. I understand my post won't be popular, though I'm still interested in hearing the opposition.

 

[zerocool84]

When Ubisoft's servers went down, legitimate players couldn't play their games, even if it was single-player which is retarded.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Seems like that would limit the games you can play. And it'll only get worse with more Steam and now Origin exclusives on the way.

It does, and its keeping me on old games more often, which is just the way it has to be. I used to buy a game every week or two. Now probably a game every 3 months or less. All that money now goes to other pursuits rather than the companies who chose DRM over me. Not a big deal to them really so long as its only a few people, but the worse they get the fewer customers they're going to keep. Eventually it'll catch up with em, then they'll change their tune and I can start gaming again.

 

[apoppin]

And if it doesn't go your way, what then? 😛