If not DRM then what?

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: Piuc2020
I like Stardock's method, only legit owners can get updates and they don't have to deal with activations or "insert dvd" prompts, I'm sure Sins of a Solar Empire content packs/updates are also pirated but legit customers get it first and more conveniently.

That's what it's all about, providing benefits for the paying customer, not drawbacks like it is now. Pirates don't have to deal with DRM schemes at all (kind of ironic isn't it ) and they can play the game limitless, paying customers have to deal with activation servers that can sometimes be down (see Bioshock at release) or wearing their drives and hunting for CDs everytime they play or not being able to install the game on multiple computers.

I agree 100%

Originally posted by: Piuc2020
Eventually something will be done about it, hopefully, the current DRM schemes will be phased out for more Stardock-like solutions.

Lets keep our fingers crossed. Supporting companies like stardock is definitely a start.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2
I'm no expert on the subject but it seems to me that if I'm going to download a game instead of buying it, that's going to take money out of the developers pocket.

So how would you propose they discourage piracy, apart from DRM?

I think DRM is reasonable, just not game-breaking DRM.

Check to see if disc is in drive? Sure, whatever - I have to put up with that if I play on a console anyway. Make it hard to copy the disc? Sure, whatever. CD keys? Yeah, they're fine! You only have to enter them once!

These deterrents are sufficient for your average person. They're insufficient for many pirates, but there IS NO DETERRENT for them. That's money that you were never going to make in the first place; they're not going to give up no matter how many walls you throw up.



Install software on my computer that checks for disc emulators? Bullshit, don't install software on my computer without my permission. Don't force me to install software that I don't want.

Maximum number of installs? Bullshit, I should be allowed to install it on as many computers as I want so long as I own the disc. If I want to install it on 50 computers and carry around the disc, so be it, I have the right to do so and anyone who says otherwise deserves to die in a fire.

Like in all things, DRM is fine with moderation.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: Piuc2020
Before everyone gives the (popular) "put all games on steam" solution I should remind you Steam games (both single and multiplayer) are just as easily and commonly pirated (some are even hacked to run without requiring Steam) as retail games.

Just as easily, but not just as commonly. There is a difference. I pirate many games, but I never pirate Steam games. I've seen many others admit the same.

There will always be people who pirate everything, so why even consider them? They're going to pirate it anyway. You'll never reach them.

You need to convince the common pirate to purchase the game, and providing unobtrusive DRM is a good way to do that. Allowing me to download and install the game ANYWHERE (via Steam) is one of the best features I've ever seen in any content distribution system ever.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: mindcycle
You create a good game that people want to buy and focus on your potential customers, not on stopping people from pirating. You provide paying customers with extra content, free updates, a community message board system, etc.. Things that reward them for purchasing your game. What you don't do is punish them by attaching invasive DRM that does nothing to stop piracy in the first place. Pirates will pirate games no matter what, and it's usually the paying customers who get the short end of the stick when they have to deal with DRM.

So your proposed solution is "make better games"?

Yes, this is how I feel as well. Someone else mentioned the offering of demos which is also very high on my priority list. It is all about rewarding players for making their purchase. Making them afraid to buy your software in fear that it will not work thanks to overly strict security measures is too much. We are not paying to "borrow" their product. We are paying for a copy of their product and we should be able to do what we want with it within reason. What a lot of DRM prevents the user from doing is far from reasonable and it stops me from making purchases because I am afraid it will end up not working as intended and I will have wasted my money since I cannot return the product for a refund. That plus I am disgusted by being treated like a criminal. This isn't a case airport security trying to prevent "terrorism". It's freakin game!

 

[Fox5]

Lol, I wonder how much of "piracy" is really just people buying used games.
Gamestop profits are booming, and afaik, there's no way to tell a used game apart from a pirated game.
And from the licensing agreements in most games, there isn't a legal way to tell the two apart either.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2
I'm no expert on the subject but it seems to me that if I'm going to download a game instead of buying it, that's going to take money out of the developers pocket.

So how would you propose they discourage piracy, apart from DRM?

You start with 2 questionable premises.

1) That pirated games take money away from devs.

Undoubtedly some sales are lost. How many is unknown. The number of games worth shelling out $50 for is pretty small IMO.

I wonder what the number of pirated sales that would have been translated into actual sales would have been, compared with the number of sales they lose b/c people refuse to by DRM loaded games. Probably about even, but they take a PR hit for being dicks to their good customers.

Look at Napster. Millions were using it, but when it was shut down, did the record industry see skyrocketing sales? Nope. People who were buying when Napster was around kept buying after Napster went away, and pirates migrated somewhere else. And some people like me stopped buying all music once the RIAA started suing everyone in sight.

2) That DRM discourages piracy.

It's like saying 5 day waiting periods discourages gun ownership. All it really does is prevent honest citizens from immediate access to a gun, while criminals aren't going to go buy their guns in a shop in the first place.

DRM just pisses off paying customers in order to try to stop people who are unlikely to buy your game anyway from getting it for free, and often causes software hiccups while doing so. It's a losing strategy, like suing your customers.

So, what should they do? IMO, nothing in the software. They should discourage piracy and speak out against it, and prosecute major distribution pirating centers when discovered, but they should not implement DRM. Honest customers will continue paying, pirates will continue pirating.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: jonks
So, what should they do? IMO, nothing in the software. They should discourage piracy and speak out against it, and prosecute major distribution pirating centers when discovered, but they should not implement DRM. Honest customers will continue paying, pirates will continue pirating.

I think it is funny that they used to have the right idea even though they were not very successful doing so. They used to target the problem at the source which are the core distributors and the programmers which crack the security. They have proven to be incompetent when it comes to defeating their true enemy so now they have decided to focus their attack in such a way that harms the innocent more than it harms the real trouble makers. It makes no sense to me. The worst part is that I believe they are well aware of this fact. They just have no idea how else to deal with the problem and it makes them feel better that they are doing something which also reduces the pressures they get from the RIAA. They stare at projected estimates of how much money they are saving by using DRM even though projections are most likely very inaccurate and based on a lot of incorrect details as well as omitting other very important details. Whatever helps them sleep at night right?

They need to realize that they are only shooting themselves in the foot and if they want to make real progress they need to go back to refining their tactics of defeating the problem at the source.

 

[wanderer27]

Originally posted by: Piuc2020
That's what it's all about, providing benefits for the paying customer, not drawbacks like it is now. Pirates don't have to deal with DRM schemes at all (kind of ironic isn't it ) and they can play the game limitless, paying customers have to deal with activation servers that can sometimes be down (see Bioshock at release) or wearing their drives and hunting for CDs everytime they play or not being able to install the game on multiple computers.

You're right, they're beating on the good guy and more or less rewarding the bad guy (no DRM/issues).

Maybe we should just operate the way they do; just buy used versions of the game.
This way we get to play the game, but since we have to put up with their DRM BS we're not going to give them any additional (new game sales vs used) revenue.

Yeah, the developers will get screwed as well.
Maybe this is a good thing - go the Indie route and stop trying to be all things to all people.
On that note, I've been finding myself buying quite a few Indie games of late - way more than any big dev games I've purchased in the last couple years.

We already have too many monolithic monopolistic game companies (EA anyone?), and I think we've seen pretty well how that's impacted the quality/originality of games.

Eventually something will be done about it, hopefully, the current DRM schemes will be phased out for more Stardock-like solutions.

I really like the Stardock model.
What's sad is that they'll (Stardock) probably get bought by someone like EA, since we all know successful competition can't be tolerated.

 

[coloumb]

Originally posted by: wanderer27

Maybe we should just operate the way they do; just buy used versions of the game.
This way we get to play the game, but since we have to put up with their DRM BS we're not going to give them any additional (new game sales vs used) revenue

Ebay FTW!

 

[wanderer27]

Originally posted by: coloumb

Originally posted by: wanderer27

Maybe we should just operate the way they do; just buy used versions of the game.
This way we get to play the game, but since we have to put up with their DRM BS we're not going to give them any additional (new game sales vs used) revenue

Ebay FTW!

Yeah, Gamestop and Half Price books used to handle used PC games as well - I think Half Price still does, not sure about Gamestop.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: wanderer27

Eventually something will be done about it, hopefully, the current DRM schemes will be phased out for more Stardock-like solutions.

I really like the Stardock model.
What's sad is that they'll (Stardock) probably get bought by someone like EA, since we all know successful competition can't be tolerated.

Stardock has some attractive views on the matter, but they have to be able to make a lot of money and a lot of their views have proven to be counter productive towards such a thing. However, that doesn't mean that they or others who follow a similar line of thinking cannot meet the challenges at hand either. It all boils down to the quality of the games and additional service features that they provide to the consumer who is willing to shell out the cash. If enough consumers want to buy their products then they will end up profiting, gaining a great reputation, and eventually be noticed by some very wealthy investors who are willing to help pay to support them as well as trust in their decisions when it comes to security. As long as the quality remains high, the dollars will keep rolling in. There will be no need for DRM.

Many have tried and have failed, but it wasn't due to a lack of desire to provide a quality product. The problem is that they ran out of money to buy the time they needed to properly finish that quality product. Sometimes that is because they were not skillful enough to manage their time properly. Sometimes it is because the amount of money they had to begin with just wasn't a realistic amount. Sometimes they were flat out wasteful spenders. Whatever the reason might be, it all centers around one thing and that is the people who are working for the company. If you get enough competent people who are capable of doing a good job in a reasonable amount of time and they are absolutely committed to quality then they will win. Being committed to quality means not giving in to the temptations of immediate riches such as allowing yourself to be bought out by publishers such as EA. Just look at Blizzard. They are doing it right.

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: wanderer27

I really like the Stardock model.
What's sad is that they'll (Stardock) probably get bought by someone like EA, since we all know successful competition can't be tolerated.

Let's hope they stick to their morals and don't let that happen. That would basically go against everything they stand for.

For now Stardock is a tiny blip on EA's radar. If that changes i'll be happy, but i'm also hopeful they'll encourage others to try their way of doing things and not just submit to being bought out because they have dollar signs in their eye's..

 

[wanderer27]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: wanderer27

Eventually something will be done about it, hopefully, the current DRM schemes will be phased out for more Stardock-like solutions.

I really like the Stardock model.
What's sad is that they'll (Stardock) probably get bought by someone like EA, since we all know successful competition can't be tolerated.

Many have tried and have failed, but it wasn't due to a lack of desire to provide a quality product. The problem is that they ran out of money to buy the time they needed to properly finish that quality product. Sometimes that is because they were not skillful enough to manage their time properly. Sometimes it is because the amount of money they had to begin with just wasn't a realistic amount. Sometimes they were flat out wasteful spenders. Whatever the reason might be, it all centers around one thing and that is the people who are working for the company. If you get enough competent people who are capable of doing a good job in a reasonable amount of time and they are absolutely committed to quality then they will win. Being committed to quality means not giving in to the temptations of immediate riches such as allowing yourself to be bought out by publishers such as EA. Just look at Blizzard. They are doing it right.

I agree with pretty much everything you're saying here - I look and think; whatever happened to MicroProse, Sierra, InterPlay, Black Isle, the old EA, and countless others.
I don't know how many of these games I've bought over the years. Many of them disappeared probably for the exact reasons you point out.

But then I look at then versus now, and wonder if with the Internet and the Digital distribution etc. available today if there's a better chance for a Company like those above to do okay.
I think there's a pretty good chance in today's environment, and they don't need the obscene DRM that some are trying to force on us - and by DRM I'm referring to Rootkits, install limits, and Server Authentications (multiple).


It sounds like Stardock is doing okay, and it seems this guy is making it on his own as well as others.
Yeah, the quality (Graphics/Sound) of games available from these type developers may be a bit lower, but that's not all there is to a good game.

Good ideas and success draws attention though, and $$$ usually talks pretty loud.

 

[pcgamer321]

Punishment by death.

 

[Modelworks]

You change the media format completely.
It has been tested in labs and it would work, but since it would require everyone to purchase new drives to play the games, it hasn't made it any further.

The way it works is it is played off the media, never installed to the hard drive other than for save games and cache.
The storage media is like a cdrom, but is a custom size and bit format so you can't just pop it in another reader.
Nobody can get a complete copy of the game so there is nothing to distribute via, download, torrent, whatever.
And since it is custom media you can't just burn it on a regular media burner.

Similar to the problem pirates are having with the ps3 and copying games.

Or an even older console that has yet to be broken , the sega saturn.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: coloumb
Sadly - you can't stop piracy... at least not yet.

If EA has it's way - I predict that all software will be bio-linked to the original purchaser and require a sample of your blood in order to install and run.

Blood collected from the unannounced new peripheral that 'raises the stakes for FPS games! Hear your opponents' scream!'

 

[wanderer27]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
You change the media format completely.
It has been tested in labs and it would work, but since it would require everyone to purchase new drives to play the games, it hasn't made it any further.

The way it works is it is played off the media, never installed to the hard drive other than for save games and cache.
The storage media is like a cdrom, but is a custom size and bit format so you can't just pop it in another reader.
Nobody can get a complete copy of the game so there is nothing to distribute via, download, torrent, whatever.
And since it is custom media you can't just burn it on a regular media burner.

Similar to the problem pirates are having with the ps3 and copying games.

Or an even older console that has yet to be broken , the sega saturn.

Modified USB stick?

Of course then you also lose your ability to backup your game/software, and the extra per game cost (USB drives) would probably raise the game price.

Then you've got the issue of keeping track of all USB sticks . . . .

 

[videogames101]

Steam

/thread

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: CKent
CD checks are not cool, they put wear & tear on a disc even if you baby it.

Sorry to quote 3 pages back, but the above statement is absolutely true. Keeping the Diablo disc in the tray 24/7 scratched the hell out of it after a few months.

While I can't give any ideas for how to stop piracy, I can say with 100% certainty that I would buy more games if they were easier to use.
-I need to make damn sure I never lose the instruction manuals
-I have text files with records of all CD keys for all games.
-I need to make backup copies of all game cracks
-I can't move the game folder from one drive to another without breaking the game
-Save games are no longer located in the game folder, so it's a fun adventure when you try to take your save games from your old computer over to your new computer
-Games rely on the registry, so I can't just take a USB hard drive to a friend's house and show him my game; I need to install it on his computer as well. They're forcing me to break the law, wtf??

Console gamers don't need to deal with any of that bullshit:
-Xbox games do not have CD keys
-Xbox games do not require cracks
-Xbox games can easily be moved between Xboxes
-Save games are located on the Xbox removable hard drive or memory card, always
-Xbox games are in no way tied to the Xbox; you can take the game to a friend's house whenever you want

Do PC publishers just have their heads in their asses? It takes really strong dedication to be a PC gamer. A normal reasonable person would just buy 360 or PS3 and say goodbye to PC gaming forever. The only reason I don't own a PS3 is because I hate console controllers. Swear to god, that's the only reason. If they ever get keyboard/mouse working on Xbox or PS3, I'm gone.

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: CKent
While I can't give any ideas for how to stop piracy, I can say with 100% certainty that I would buy more games if they were easier to use.

That's why my vote is for no copy protection at all. Let the pirates pirate. They're going to anyway, no matter what ridiculous copy protection is attached to the game. The developers, and especially the publishing companies, need to focus on their customers and their needs, not pirates.

Originally posted by: CKent
The only reason I don't own a PS3 is because I hate console controllers. Swear to god, that's the only reason. If they ever get keyboard/mouse working on Xbox or PS3, I'm gone.

Well, i'm gonna give you your answer. It's called an XIM and it allows you to use any keyboard and mouse to control 360 games. It works with PS3 as well I think. It's one of the main reason I bought a console since I refuse to play FPS's with a controller, and there are some decent ones out there that are console only.

http://xim360.com/

Plus it's so much easier to just throw a disc in the drive and play. You don't have to activate anything, no serial numbers, you don't need an internet connection, nor is there an install limit. And with the fall 360 dashboard update you'll be able to install games to the HD so they load faster, etc.. PC game publishers need to get with the times. People don't want to go through all this hassle just to play a game. Console sales prove that.