As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Ubisoft busting out the online DRM beams

18911131455

Posts

  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    I've got the best DRM.

    Accounts made with a service that allows you to download and install games through it. You can buy games via the net or register your CD key from retail to the account, binding it to you forever. While you'd have to be logged onto the tool in order to play your games, the tool will automatically update games and you'll have access to a friends-list system where you can talk across games you're playing. You can also use the tool to find and favorite servers to play on. We can call it Vapor or Smoke, something along those lines.

    Henroid on
  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Dyscord wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    Jephery wrote: »
    A lot of posts have been discussing this - piracy does not necessarily result in lost revenue.

    No offense, but that's a load of crap. Yes, it's correct that the revenue loss from piracy isn't 100%. You have the compulsive pirates who have to download everything yet never play it. Yet the amount of revenue loss isn't zero, either. My friend Dwight (not his real name) has a well-paying job, yet pirates all his games. He tends to play these games to completion, and talk about them excitedly to me. He actively enjoys them. It's pretty clear that if piracy somehow didn't exist, he would be paying for his games. And I'm sure he's hardly the only person out there like that.

    So, the amount of revenue loss isn't 100%, but it isn't zero. The debate often rages about where the number actually is within that spectrum, but that's missing the point. Any nonzero revenue loss means companies lose money. And companies don't like losing money... it kind of runs counter to the entire point of their existence. If you really think that companies should just chill out, that the revenue loss is too small to matter, then I invite you to go down to Wal-Mart, steal a pack of gum while waving it in the clerk's face, and see what the reaction will be.

    The problem is this idea that it's possible to stamp out piracy. It's not; piracy has been an issue since the second guy built a printing press. As ubisoft is currently showing us, the consequences of attempting to actually stamp out piracy quickly become worse than just accepting it.

    Piracy happens because it provides better service than retail outlets. Sometimes the service provided is "free games!," but it's also "there's no DRM" or "I can download this overnight rather than going to the mall" or "I can't find a retail copy anywhere." Most people have enough disposable income that they're willing to pay if the service is good; piracy's a hassle if you aren't conversant in how it works and/or a superuser on a private torrent site.

    And the worst part is, there are a few games where the pirated copy is less of a hassle than buying the goddamn thing in a store, taking it home and installing, WITHOUT ANY REGARD TO TIME. The Spore DRM is the biggest shitfuck I've ever experienced where, if I want to connect it to online content I'm going to have to call EA now. For the most part, I'd much rather have to enter a CD key and put the CD in every time even if it's less secure than deal with shitbird online DRM mostly because it can become this draconian hassle if you even purchase the game.

    mrt144 on
  • MonkeyConQuesoMonkeyConQueso No more MH Claw Happy handsRegistered User regular
    edited February 2010
    LewieP wrote: »

    That's actually a decent plan. Poor Tesco, lol! That is probably a better plan than just withholding your money.

    MonkeyConQueso on
    PSN : Aubvry ;; WiiU/XBL/Steam : MonkeyConQueso ;; 3DS FC : 4553-9982-3786
    Destiny! : Warlock - Titan - Hunter
  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Dyscord wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    Jephery wrote: »
    A lot of posts have been discussing this - piracy does not necessarily result in lost revenue.

    No offense, but that's a load of crap. Yes, it's correct that the revenue loss from piracy isn't 100%. You have the compulsive pirates who have to download everything yet never play it. Yet the amount of revenue loss isn't zero, either. My friend Dwight (not his real name) has a well-paying job, yet pirates all his games. He tends to play these games to completion, and talk about them excitedly to me. He actively enjoys them. It's pretty clear that if piracy somehow didn't exist, he would be paying for his games. And I'm sure he's hardly the only person out there like that.

    So, the amount of revenue loss isn't 100%, but it isn't zero. The debate often rages about where the number actually is within that spectrum, but that's missing the point. Any nonzero revenue loss means companies lose money. And companies don't like losing money... it kind of runs counter to the entire point of their existence. If you really think that companies should just chill out, that the revenue loss is too small to matter, then I invite you to go down to Wal-Mart, steal a pack of gum while waving it in the clerk's face, and see what the reaction will be.

    The problem is this idea that it's possible to stamp out piracy. It's not; piracy has been an issue since the second guy built a printing press. As ubisoft is currently showing us, the consequences of attempting to actually stamp out piracy quickly become worse than just accepting it.

    Piracy happens because it provides better service than retail outlets. Sometimes the service provided is "free games!," but it's also "there's no DRM" or "I can download this overnight rather than going to the mall" or "I can't find a retail copy anywhere." Most people have enough disposable income that they're willing to pay if the service is good; piracy's a hassle if you aren't conversant in how it works and/or a superuser on a private torrent site.

    But of course. Pirates have the determination and talent to crack just about anything, the only question is when. Ubisoft is likely gambling that their DRM scheme will be just difficult/time-consuming enough to crack that a number of piracy-prone people go "fuck waiting, I want to play this now" and buy the game. The problem is that the DRM is so fucking annoying to regular buyers that a bunch of them will turn to piracy out of spite or the desire to fix the damn thing.

    Piracy does hurt the developers/publishers to some extent, but no one has the slightest clue how to effectively stop it or even cut into it without punishing regular buyers in some way. It's depressing, really.

    cloudeagle on
    Switch: 3947-4890-9293
  • Ninja Snarl PNinja Snarl P My helmet is my burden. Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Boo, I hate the good plan. I demand an online petition with poor spelling and absolutely no grasp of reality or the fact that an online petition is about as effective as a real petition with 600 names in the same handwriting!

    Ninja Snarl P on
  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    Dyscord wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    Jephery wrote: »
    A lot of posts have been discussing this - piracy does not necessarily result in lost revenue.

    No offense, but that's a load of crap. Yes, it's correct that the revenue loss from piracy isn't 100%. You have the compulsive pirates who have to download everything yet never play it. Yet the amount of revenue loss isn't zero, either. My friend Dwight (not his real name) has a well-paying job, yet pirates all his games. He tends to play these games to completion, and talk about them excitedly to me. He actively enjoys them. It's pretty clear that if piracy somehow didn't exist, he would be paying for his games. And I'm sure he's hardly the only person out there like that.

    So, the amount of revenue loss isn't 100%, but it isn't zero. The debate often rages about where the number actually is within that spectrum, but that's missing the point. Any nonzero revenue loss means companies lose money. And companies don't like losing money... it kind of runs counter to the entire point of their existence. If you really think that companies should just chill out, that the revenue loss is too small to matter, then I invite you to go down to Wal-Mart, steal a pack of gum while waving it in the clerk's face, and see what the reaction will be.

    The problem is this idea that it's possible to stamp out piracy. It's not; piracy has been an issue since the second guy built a printing press. As ubisoft is currently showing us, the consequences of attempting to actually stamp out piracy quickly become worse than just accepting it.

    Piracy happens because it provides better service than retail outlets. Sometimes the service provided is "free games!," but it's also "there's no DRM" or "I can download this overnight rather than going to the mall" or "I can't find a retail copy anywhere." Most people have enough disposable income that they're willing to pay if the service is good; piracy's a hassle if you aren't conversant in how it works and/or a superuser on a private torrent site.

    But of course. Pirates have the determination and talent to crack just about anything, the only question is when. Ubisoft is likely gambling that their DRM scheme will be just difficult/time-consuming enough to crack that a number of piracy-prone people go "fuck waiting, I want to play this now" and buy the game. The problem is that the DRM is so fucking annoying to regular buyers that a bunch of them will turn to piracy out of spite or the desire to fix the damn thing.

    Piracy does hurt the developers/publishers to some extent, but no one has the slightest clue how to effectively stop it or even cut into it without punishing regular buyers in some way. It's depressing, really.

    For some pirates, it's not even about anything other than doing it for shits and giggles. Ebola Virus Crew.

    mrt144 on
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    Dyscord wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    Jephery wrote: »
    A lot of posts have been discussing this - piracy does not necessarily result in lost revenue.

    No offense, but that's a load of crap. Yes, it's correct that the revenue loss from piracy isn't 100%. You have the compulsive pirates who have to download everything yet never play it. Yet the amount of revenue loss isn't zero, either. My friend Dwight (not his real name) has a well-paying job, yet pirates all his games. He tends to play these games to completion, and talk about them excitedly to me. He actively enjoys them. It's pretty clear that if piracy somehow didn't exist, he would be paying for his games. And I'm sure he's hardly the only person out there like that.

    So, the amount of revenue loss isn't 100%, but it isn't zero. The debate often rages about where the number actually is within that spectrum, but that's missing the point. Any nonzero revenue loss means companies lose money. And companies don't like losing money... it kind of runs counter to the entire point of their existence. If you really think that companies should just chill out, that the revenue loss is too small to matter, then I invite you to go down to Wal-Mart, steal a pack of gum while waving it in the clerk's face, and see what the reaction will be.

    The problem is this idea that it's possible to stamp out piracy. It's not; piracy has been an issue since the second guy built a printing press. As ubisoft is currently showing us, the consequences of attempting to actually stamp out piracy quickly become worse than just accepting it.

    Piracy happens because it provides better service than retail outlets. Sometimes the service provided is "free games!," but it's also "there's no DRM" or "I can download this overnight rather than going to the mall" or "I can't find a retail copy anywhere." Most people have enough disposable income that they're willing to pay if the service is good; piracy's a hassle if you aren't conversant in how it works and/or a superuser on a private torrent site.

    But of course. Pirates have the determination and talent to crack just about anything, the only question is when. Ubisoft is likely gambling that their DRM scheme will be just difficult/time-consuming enough to crack that a number of piracy-prone people go "fuck waiting, I want to play this now" and buy the thing. The problem is that the DRM is so fucking annoying to regular buyers that a bunch of them will turn to piracy out of spite or the desire to fix the damn thing.

    Piracy does hurt the developers/publishers to some extent, but no one has the slightest clue how to effectively stop it or even cut into it without punishing regular buyers in some way. It's depressing, really.

    No, we do know how to cut into it. The way to cut into it is to treat it as a competitor.

    People are willing to pay for convenience if you actually provide a good service; the itunes music store is the best recent example of this. Why would you pay to download an album from itunes when you could just fire up your filesharing app of choice? Well, because on itunes you know you're getting a fast download of a good, high quality copy along with the album art and whatever else, and you're getting it within the confines of the same slick interface that will let you play it once it's downloaded.

    This is basically what steam does with games; why would you download a game from steam when you could just pirate it? Because people will pay for good service.

    Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
    NREqxl5.jpg
    it was the smallest on the list but
    Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Dyscord wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    Dyscord wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    Jephery wrote: »
    A lot of posts have been discussing this - piracy does not necessarily result in lost revenue.

    No offense, but that's a load of crap. Yes, it's correct that the revenue loss from piracy isn't 100%. You have the compulsive pirates who have to download everything yet never play it. Yet the amount of revenue loss isn't zero, either. My friend Dwight (not his real name) has a well-paying job, yet pirates all his games. He tends to play these games to completion, and talk about them excitedly to me. He actively enjoys them. It's pretty clear that if piracy somehow didn't exist, he would be paying for his games. And I'm sure he's hardly the only person out there like that.

    So, the amount of revenue loss isn't 100%, but it isn't zero. The debate often rages about where the number actually is within that spectrum, but that's missing the point. Any nonzero revenue loss means companies lose money. And companies don't like losing money... it kind of runs counter to the entire point of their existence. If you really think that companies should just chill out, that the revenue loss is too small to matter, then I invite you to go down to Wal-Mart, steal a pack of gum while waving it in the clerk's face, and see what the reaction will be.

    The problem is this idea that it's possible to stamp out piracy. It's not; piracy has been an issue since the second guy built a printing press. As ubisoft is currently showing us, the consequences of attempting to actually stamp out piracy quickly become worse than just accepting it.

    Piracy happens because it provides better service than retail outlets. Sometimes the service provided is "free games!," but it's also "there's no DRM" or "I can download this overnight rather than going to the mall" or "I can't find a retail copy anywhere." Most people have enough disposable income that they're willing to pay if the service is good; piracy's a hassle if you aren't conversant in how it works and/or a superuser on a private torrent site.

    But of course. Pirates have the determination and talent to crack just about anything, the only question is when. Ubisoft is likely gambling that their DRM scheme will be just difficult/time-consuming enough to crack that a number of piracy-prone people go "fuck waiting, I want to play this now" and buy the thing. The problem is that the DRM is so fucking annoying to regular buyers that a bunch of them will turn to piracy out of spite or the desire to fix the damn thing.

    Piracy does hurt the developers/publishers to some extent, but no one has the slightest clue how to effectively stop it or even cut into it without punishing regular buyers in some way. It's depressing, really.

    No, we do know how to cut into it. The way to cut into it is to treat it as a competitor.

    People are willing to pay for convenience if you actually provide a good service; the itunes music store is the best recent example of this. Why would you pay to download an album from itunes when you could just fire up your filesharing app of choice? Well, because on itunes you know you're getting a fast download of a good, high quality copy along with the album art and whatever else, and you're getting it within the confines of the same slick interface that will let you play it once it's downloaded.

    This is basically what steam does with games; why would you download a game from steam when you could just pirate it? Because people will pay for good service.

    And even though you didn't explicitly state it, people will pay for perceived added value. That's what album art, achievements, etc etc do, create the perception of added value. Carrots, not sticks are what get you sales. Ubisoft is not doing anything in this regard.

    mrt144 on
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    yeah, I did forget value adds. One of the things bioware seems to have figured out is that adding "free" DLC with retail copies is a great way to disincentivize piracy and get people in general to want to buy a new copy.

    Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
    NREqxl5.jpg
    it was the smallest on the list but
    Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
  • subediisubedii Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Dyscord wrote: »

    No, we do know how to cut into it. The way to cut into it is to treat it as a competitor.

    People are willing to pay for convenience if you actually provide a good service; the itunes music store is the best recent example of this. Why would you pay to download an album from itunes when you could just fire up your filesharing app of choice? Well, because on itunes you know you're getting a fast download of a good, high quality copy along with the album art and whatever else, and you're getting it within the confines of the same slick interface that will let you play it once it's downloaded.

    This is basically what steam does with games; why would you download a game from steam when you could just pirate it? Because people will pay for good service.

    Interestingly enough, this is CD Projekt's stated manner of business as well: treat the pirates as competitors.

    Frankly, that's just hyperbole on their part, they can't really claim to know much about the PC games industry, at least not to the same extent as a larger player like Ubisoft. I can't say they ever breached decent numbers with any of their titles. And any statements about "bad" DRM are complete hypocrisy unless they're willing to put their money where their mouth is and release anything, even one thing, without without DRM, let alone online verification checks and similar. Those are the staples of today's market.

    Heck, maybe if they had any innovative business models or something to suggest I MIGHT listen to them, but come on, you'd at least need your own store or, or a decent relationship with one or something to start suggesting how to do business. Being a Polish developer I doubt they've shipped much beyond mainland Europe to begin with, it's not like they'd know or care about piracy issues and its relation to larger scale international publishing.

    subedii on
  • travathiantravathian Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Dyscord wrote: »
    yeah, I did forget value adds. One of the things bioware seems to have figured out is that adding "free" DLC with retail copies is a great way to disincentivize piracy and get people in general to want to buy a new copy.

    This is what Stardock has been doing for years. No DRM, but all games have a licensing key. Download their software, register your key, get immediate access to new patches/updates/betas. Pirate the game and you get v1.0 at least until someone cracks each version of the patch, but a lot of pirating groups don't stick around in the long term to deal with patches.

    edit: And last I checked Stardock was still making games, still making a profit, and still catering to their customers.

    travathian on
  • JihadJesusJihadJesus Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Dyscord wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    Piracy does hurt the developers/publishers to some extent, but no one has the slightest clue how to effectively stop it or even cut into it without punishing regular buyers in some way. It's depressing, really.
    No, we do know how to cut into it. The way to cut into it is to treat it as a competitor.
    This, so much.

    JihadJesus on
  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    subedii wrote: »
    Dyscord wrote: »

    No, we do know how to cut into it. The way to cut into it is to treat it as a competitor.

    People are willing to pay for convenience if you actually provide a good service; the itunes music store is the best recent example of this. Why would you pay to download an album from itunes when you could just fire up your filesharing app of choice? Well, because on itunes you know you're getting a fast download of a good, high quality copy along with the album art and whatever else, and you're getting it within the confines of the same slick interface that will let you play it once it's downloaded.

    This is basically what steam does with games; why would you download a game from steam when you could just pirate it? Because people will pay for good service.

    Interestingly enough, this is CD Projekt's stated manner of business as well: treat the pirates as competitors.

    Frankly, that's just hyperbole on their part, they can't really claim to know much about the PC games industry, at least not to the same extent as a larger player like Ubisoft. I can't say they ever breached decent numbers with any of their titles. And any statements about "bad" DRM are complete hypocrisy unless they're willing to put their money where their mouth is and release anything, even one thing, without without DRM, let alone online verification checks and similar. Those are the staples of today's market.

    Heck, maybe if they had any innovative business models or something to suggest I MIGHT listen to them, but come on, you'd at least need your own store or, or a decent relationship with one or something to start suggesting how to do business. Being a Polish developer I doubt they've shipped much beyond mainland Europe to begin with, it's not like they'd know or care about piracy issues and its relation to larger scale international publishing.

    :lol: Sarcasm for our viewers at home.

    mrt144 on
  • Dox the PIDox the PI Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    You will never be able to stop pirates with DRM.
    At the end of the day there's more people trying to hack it then Dev's have working on it.

    Dox the PI on
  • travathiantravathian Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Dox the PI wrote: »
    You will never be able to stop pirates with DRM.
    At the end of the day there's more people trying to hack it then Dev's have working on it.

    And, as was already mentioned, plenty of the DRM crackers just do it for shits and giggles. How the fuck do you compete with that? You don't.

    travathian on
  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Dox the PI wrote: »
    You will never be able to stop pirates with DRM.
    At the end of the day there's more people trying to hack it then Dev's have working on it.

    Hence my Game Dev Game where the object is to create DRM faster than the hackers can crack it.

    mrt144 on
  • MonkeyConQuesoMonkeyConQueso No more MH Claw Happy handsRegistered User regular
    edited February 2010
    mrt144 wrote: »
    Dox the PI wrote: »
    You will never be able to stop pirates with DRM.
    At the end of the day there's more people trying to hack it then Dev's have working on it.

    Hence my Game Dev Game where the object is to create DRM faster than the hackers can crack it.

    "Shall we play a game?"

    MonkeyConQueso on
    PSN : Aubvry ;; WiiU/XBL/Steam : MonkeyConQueso ;; 3DS FC : 4553-9982-3786
    Destiny! : Warlock - Titan - Hunter
  • SmokeStacksSmokeStacks Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    mrt144 wrote: »
    Dox the PI wrote: »
    You will never be able to stop pirates with DRM.
    At the end of the day there's more people trying to hack it then Dev's have working on it.

    Hence my Game Dev Game where the object is to create DRM faster than the hackers can crack it.

    This sounds like a cool idea. What is it, a puzzle game?

    I would play that.

    SmokeStacks on
  • AxenAxen My avatar is Excalibur. Yes, the sword.Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    mrt144 wrote: »
    Dox the PI wrote: »
    You will never be able to stop pirates with DRM.
    At the end of the day there's more people trying to hack it then Dev's have working on it.

    Hence my Game Dev Game where the object is to create DRM faster than the hackers can crack it.

    DRM doesn't bother me a whole lot. I mean, you don't have to pirate a game to get the "convenience" that pirates enjoy. You can just buy it like normal and then crack it. I suppose it may be against the EULA, but who cares? They already have my money.

    Axen on
    A Capellan's favorite sheath for any blade is your back.
  • subediisubedii Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    mrt144 wrote: »
    subedii wrote: »
    Dyscord wrote: »

    No, we do know how to cut into it. The way to cut into it is to treat it as a competitor.

    People are willing to pay for convenience if you actually provide a good service; the itunes music store is the best recent example of this. Why would you pay to download an album from itunes when you could just fire up your filesharing app of choice? Well, because on itunes you know you're getting a fast download of a good, high quality copy along with the album art and whatever else, and you're getting it within the confines of the same slick interface that will let you play it once it's downloaded.

    This is basically what steam does with games; why would you download a game from steam when you could just pirate it? Because people will pay for good service.

    Interestingly enough, this is CD Projekt's stated manner of business as well: treat the pirates as competitors.

    Frankly, that's just hyperbole on their part, they can't really claim to know much about the PC games industry, at least not to the same extent as a larger player like Ubisoft. I can't say they ever breached decent numbers with any of their titles. And any statements about "bad" DRM are complete hypocrisy unless they're willing to put their money where their mouth is and release anything, even one thing, without without DRM, let alone online verification checks and similar. Those are the staples of today's market.

    Heck, maybe if they had any innovative business models or something to suggest I MIGHT listen to them, but come on, you'd at least need your own store or, or a decent relationship with one or something to start suggesting how to do business. Being a Polish developer I doubt they've shipped much beyond mainland Europe to begin with, it's not like they'd know or care about piracy issues and its relation to larger scale international publishing.

    :lol: Sarcasm for our viewers at home.

    What are you talking about? It's guys like them and their backwards, outright asinine suggestions that are the reason PC gaming is so screwed up in the first place. If you can't think of a practical solution to the problems being faced by the PC industry then you should stop acting like prats and "thinking" that you've got a better idea, you don't.
    Laying it on a bit thick? :P

    I was worried if I didn't put the smiley in at the end people would start thinking I was serious.

    EDIT 2:
    Also, I am calling it right now. Whatever numbers the PC port of AC2 does, it'll be less than what the Witcher sold. I'm willing to say a LOT less.

    subedii on
  • DjiemDjiem Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    If this DRM was made to stop pirates, but there will be pirates anyway, and new pirates born out of the DRM, wouldn't Ubisoft be right in saying that the problem is pirates?

    Djiem on
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    in the same way that someone who falls and breaks their leg could say that the problem is gravity

    Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
    NREqxl5.jpg
    it was the smallest on the list but
    Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
  • BiopticBioptic Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Dyscord wrote: »
    yeah, I did forget value adds. One of the things bioware seems to have figured out is that adding "free" DLC with retail copies is a great way to disincentivize piracy and get people in general to want to buy a new copy.

    I'll agree with the latter part, but what exactly about the former discourages piracy? DLC gets pirated just as easily as the main game, and day-1 DLC would be virtually bundled in! Indeed, my Dragon Age 'free' DLC's giving me all kind of gyp, and I yearn for a version that doesn't connect to the internet each time I boot it up to 'verify' it (and sometimes fail). Guess what version that would be?

    Also, they're time-limiting the DLC, which I don't think gets mentioned enough - come April, you're going to have to pay for that stuff in Dragon Age and Mass Effect 2 even if you buy a new copy. It's not just them clawing back money from second-hand retailers, but the budget market too. It might be effective, but I really don't like it, and it's certainly not a deterrent to piracy - only second-hand console sales and those savvy enough to wait for the price to drop.

    Bioptic on
  • MishlaiMishlai Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Djiem wrote: »
    If this DRM was made to stop pirates, but there will be pirates anyway, and new pirates born out of the DRM, wouldn't Ubisoft be right in saying that the problem is pirates?

    Well yes, of course. If there were no pirates, there would be no problem. Our dilemma is that the problem of pirates doesn't have a complete solution. There are many ways to mitigate it, but I can think of no ways to stop it completely.

    The goal of a developer should not be to stop piracy - that's a waste of time. The goal should be to get as many people as possible to buy their game.

    Mishlai on
  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    mrt144 wrote: »
    Dox the PI wrote: »
    You will never be able to stop pirates with DRM.
    At the end of the day there's more people trying to hack it then Dev's have working on it.

    Hence my Game Dev Game where the object is to create DRM faster than the hackers can crack it.

    This sounds like a cool idea. What is it, a puzzle game?

    I would play that.

    It'd be more like a creature creating game where you balance customer satisfaction (creature happy) with DRM security (creature happy) and complexity (creature brains), while encountering various forms of hacking like keygen's, exe hacks, etc etc.

    mrt144 on
  • Milamber_29Milamber_29 Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Here is a fact for you guys.

    i go to LANs. possibly the biggest and easiest source of pirated data available. in days of old you could get a terabyte of stuff in a night and you still can. the difference being that games are getting less available.

    whats happening in my area now is that the LAN organisers are leaving the internet open to ONE place. steam. because lan gaming nowadays if everyone doesnt have a game like team fortress 2 your pretty much told buy it and dload it and join in. so waht u do is buy the game on steam grab the GCFs off another machine on the network and get in the game.

    is the game is NOT on steam its soically acceptable to grab a pirated copy for LAN use like for instance red faction: guilla. this is completely different from what USED to happen which is that ALL games played were taken from a pirated source.

    the reason for the change? 3 things.
    1. achivements - if you have a game where you can customise and need time to create a charactor and get experience and set up exactly as u want like modern warfare your gonna need a legit copy to do that effectivly

    2. availability - steam alows the DATA to be shared freely without having to OWN the game but at the same time controls your access to the game if u havent bought it without then making your life hell if you do. so if you are at a lan u can get in a game within 10 min with a legit copy of your own.

    3. social pressure - your not going to believe me on this one but when most people have a legit game at a lan you cant join with a pirated one (in then case of steam) and the social preasure becomes to get a legit copy so we can play instead off get a pirated copy so we can play.

    if you impliment these things in a game especially a multiplayer game means that there is a lot of incentive to go legit. if ubisoft bring out a multiplayer game that needs some stupid DRM and make it illeagal to copy the data around you dont realy have a legal avenue to get their game around a room of people and get it noticed. why cant they see the problem with that on thier sales?

    so my question is ...if steam works so well and actually makes a difference to the way people behaves. i mean it has been around for quite a while and while we hated it at first now it just makes sence. why should you abandon that for something thats harmful to your sales and your customers.

    Milamber_29 on
  • subediisubedii Registered User regular
    edited February 2010

    so my question is ...if steam works so well and actually makes a difference to the way people behaves. i mean it has been around for quite a while and while we hated it at first now it just makes sence. why should you abandon that for something thats harmful to your sales and your customers.

    They've already said why. Steam isn't perfect DRM, and they believe their current system is.

    subedii on
  • LittleBootsLittleBoots Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    subedii wrote: »

    so my question is ...if steam works so well and actually makes a difference to the way people behaves. i mean it has been around for quite a while and while we hated it at first now it just makes sence. why should you abandon that for something thats harmful to your sales and your customers.

    They've already said why. Steam isn't perfect DRM, and they believe their current system is.

    They're fools! FOOLS I SAY!

    *shakes fist in air*

    LittleBoots on

    Tofu wrote: Here be Littleboots, destroyer of threads and master of drunkposting.
  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Here is a fact for you guys.

    i go to LANs. possibly the biggest and easiest source of pirated data available. in days of old you could get a terabyte of stuff in a night and you still can. the difference being that games are getting less available.

    In days of old a terabyte was impossible to store. (I still remember the time I went on my friends c share, looked for large files and folders and found a huge .dat file that was too big to exist in that folder. I changed it to .zip, and lo and behold it was all his porn. Much hilarity ensued when I told him in front of everyone that I had found his stash, he insisted he had none, i told him the location and file of it and he turned bright red and claimed that was "totally uncool" of me to do).

    And this is an anecdote.

    mrt144 on
  • travathiantravathian Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    subedii wrote: »

    so my question is ...if steam works so well and actually makes a difference to the way people behaves. i mean it has been around for quite a while and while we hated it at first now it just makes sence. why should you abandon that for something thats harmful to your sales and your customers.

    They've already said why. Steam isn't perfect DRM, and they believe their current system is.

    The fallacy of their argument is that a perfect DRM system exists. I think it is just a front and they are tired of giving Steam a cut of their profits.

    travathian on
  • JucJuc EdmontonRegistered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Bioptic wrote: »
    Also, they're time-limiting the DLC, which I don't think gets mentioned enough - come April, you're going to have to pay for that stuff in Dragon Age and Mass Effect 2 even if you buy a new copy. It's not just them clawing back money from second-hand retailers, but the budget market too. It might be effective, but I really don't like it, and it's certainly not a deterrent to piracy - only second-hand console sales and those savvy enough to wait for the price to drop.

    Huh?

    Juc on
  • Milamber_29Milamber_29 Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    nothing is a perfect drm im just pointing out that steam encourages the purchase of games. not only because it adds convieniece in so many ways with the ability to preload games and the price point for older games is always good. ( cant tell you how often iv been browsing steam and gone "hey thats a good game. $20? done!") but it also creates a soical effect that when everyone else has a legit copy so should you so your mates can play online and at LAN.

    steam is a good model. not perfect no but its something that makes valve games and independant games stronger and encourages the spending of money because its based on the fundimentals of buisness
    make something they want and when they are in the door try and sell them more and have a big smile and good service all the way through.

    Milamber_29 on
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    travathian wrote: »
    subedii wrote: »

    so my question is ...if steam works so well and actually makes a difference to the way people behaves. i mean it has been around for quite a while and while we hated it at first now it just makes sence. why should you abandon that for something thats harmful to your sales and your customers.

    They've already said why. Steam isn't perfect DRM, and they believe their current system is.

    The fallacy of their argument is that a perfect DRM system exists. I think it is just a front and they are tired of giving Steam a cut of their profits.

    yeah, this would be my guess.

    Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
    NREqxl5.jpg
    it was the smallest on the list but
    Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
  • subediisubedii Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Oh I know that no DRM is perfect. I'm just telling you what they said.

    EDIT: And like I pointed out before, there are other stores if they don't want to use Steam. And they could just use a different DRM mechanism besides, something similar to Steam's instead of "always online"

    And DD sales typically net publishers a greater percentage of profits per unit sold compared to B&M retail. if it's between Steam and Gamestop, they're probably making more per unit from Steam. "Tired of giving Steam a cut" seems like shooting yourself in the foot in this instance.

    subedii on
  • lilBlilB Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Here is a fact for you guys.

    i go to LANs. possibly the biggest and easiest source of pirated data available. in days of old you could get a terabyte of stuff in a night and you still can. the difference being that games are getting less available.

    whats happening in my area now is that the LAN organisers are leaving the internet open to ONE place. steam. because lan gaming nowadays if everyone doesnt have a game like team fortress 2 your pretty much told buy it and dload it and join in. so waht u do is buy the game on steam grab the GCFs off another machine on the network and get in the game.

    is the game is NOT on steam its soically acceptable to grab a pirated copy for LAN use like for instance red faction: guilla. this is completely different from what USED to happen which is that ALL games played were taken from a pirated source.

    the reason for the change? 3 things.
    1. achivements - if you have a game where you can customise and need time to create a charactor and get experience and set up exactly as u want like modern warfare your gonna need a legit copy to do that effectivly

    2. availability - steam alows the DATA to be shared freely without having to OWN the game but at the same time controls your access to the game if u havent bought it without then making your life hell if you do. so if you are at a lan u can get in a game within 10 min with a legit copy of your own.

    3. social pressure - your not going to believe me on this one but when most people have a legit game at a lan you cant join with a pirated one (in then case of steam) and the social preasure becomes to get a legit copy so we can play instead off get a pirated copy so we can play.

    if you impliment these things in a game especially a multiplayer game means that there is a lot of incentive to go legit. if ubisoft bring out a multiplayer game that needs some stupid DRM and make it illeagal to copy the data around you dont realy have a legal avenue to get their game around a room of people and get it noticed. why cant they see the problem with that on thier sales?

    so my question is ...if steam works so well and actually makes a difference to the way people behaves. i mean it has been around for quite a while and while we hated it at first now it just makes sence. why should you abandon that for something thats harmful to your sales and your customers.

    Because with steam you can share your login with people, which makes lending possible. They probably also want more control over distribution.

    lilB on
  • übergeekübergeek Sector 2814Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    lilB wrote: »
    Here is a fact for you guys.

    i go to LANs. possibly the biggest and easiest source of pirated data available. in days of old you could get a terabyte of stuff in a night and you still can. the difference being that games are getting less available.

    whats happening in my area now is that the LAN organisers are leaving the internet open to ONE place. steam. because lan gaming nowadays if everyone doesnt have a game like team fortress 2 your pretty much told buy it and dload it and join in. so waht u do is buy the game on steam grab the GCFs off another machine on the network and get in the game.

    is the game is NOT on steam its soically acceptable to grab a pirated copy for LAN use like for instance red faction: guilla. this is completely different from what USED to happen which is that ALL games played were taken from a pirated source.

    the reason for the change? 3 things.
    1. achivements - if you have a game where you can customise and need time to create a charactor and get experience and set up exactly as u want like modern warfare your gonna need a legit copy to do that effectivly

    2. availability - steam alows the DATA to be shared freely without having to OWN the game but at the same time controls your access to the game if u havent bought it without then making your life hell if you do. so if you are at a lan u can get in a game within 10 min with a legit copy of your own.

    3. social pressure - your not going to believe me on this one but when most people have a legit game at a lan you cant join with a pirated one (in then case of steam) and the social preasure becomes to get a legit copy so we can play instead off get a pirated copy so we can play.

    if you impliment these things in a game especially a multiplayer game means that there is a lot of incentive to go legit. if ubisoft bring out a multiplayer game that needs some stupid DRM and make it illeagal to copy the data around you dont realy have a legal avenue to get their game around a room of people and get it noticed. why cant they see the problem with that on thier sales?

    so my question is ...if steam works so well and actually makes a difference to the way people behaves. i mean it has been around for quite a while and while we hated it at first now it just makes sence. why should you abandon that for something thats harmful to your sales and your customers.

    Because with steam you can share your login with people, which makes lending possible. They probably also want more control over distribution.

    Part of the always on is that they'll make you log into uPlay, with the cloud saving and unlimited installs, you can still pass that one copy around to friends.

    übergeek on
    camo_sig.png
  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    lilB wrote: »
    Here is a fact for you guys.

    i go to LANs. possibly the biggest and easiest source of pirated data available. in days of old you could get a terabyte of stuff in a night and you still can. the difference being that games are getting less available.

    whats happening in my area now is that the LAN organisers are leaving the internet open to ONE place. steam. because lan gaming nowadays if everyone doesnt have a game like team fortress 2 your pretty much told buy it and dload it and join in. so waht u do is buy the game on steam grab the GCFs off another machine on the network and get in the game.

    is the game is NOT on steam its soically acceptable to grab a pirated copy for LAN use like for instance red faction: guilla. this is completely different from what USED to happen which is that ALL games played were taken from a pirated source.

    the reason for the change? 3 things.
    1. achivements - if you have a game where you can customise and need time to create a charactor and get experience and set up exactly as u want like modern warfare your gonna need a legit copy to do that effectivly

    2. availability - steam alows the DATA to be shared freely without having to OWN the game but at the same time controls your access to the game if u havent bought it without then making your life hell if you do. so if you are at a lan u can get in a game within 10 min with a legit copy of your own.

    3. social pressure - your not going to believe me on this one but when most people have a legit game at a lan you cant join with a pirated one (in then case of steam) and the social preasure becomes to get a legit copy so we can play instead off get a pirated copy so we can play.

    if you impliment these things in a game especially a multiplayer game means that there is a lot of incentive to go legit. if ubisoft bring out a multiplayer game that needs some stupid DRM and make it illeagal to copy the data around you dont realy have a legal avenue to get their game around a room of people and get it noticed. why cant they see the problem with that on thier sales?

    so my question is ...if steam works so well and actually makes a difference to the way people behaves. i mean it has been around for quite a while and while we hated it at first now it just makes sence. why should you abandon that for something thats harmful to your sales and your customers.

    Because with steam you can share your login with people, which makes lending possible. They probably also want more control over distribution.

    Yeah but you can't play at the same time, or at least enjoy the benefits of Steam when bothpeople are logged in.

    mrt144 on
  • Milamber_29Milamber_29 Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    besides they dont seem that bothered when you lend a mate a 360 game.
    but its the same kinda thing. with a steam like model only one person can be playing at a time so its ok.

    Milamber_29 on
  • SurikoSuriko AustraliaRegistered User regular
    edited February 2010
  • subediisubedii Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    besides they dont seem that bothered when you lend a mate a 360 game.

    Actually they are bothered, it's just that there's no reasonable way they can say "no" without getting sued into the next millennium. Much like with the second hand market, day-one "exclusive" (to original purchaser) DLC helps alleviate this a little.

    subedii on
Sign In or Register to comment.