I'm going to get slammed for saying this. But this is exactly why copy protection schemes don't work and why developers shouldn't bother putting that crap in their games.
In the case of TQ, if they didn't have that silly copy protection, the people pirating their game wouldn't have gotten crashes and word of mouth about the game would have been better.
I know it sucks that people were stealing their game, but putting in copy protection that doesn't work obviously isn't helping AT ALL, so why bother? Especially when the end user experience can suffer (legitimate purchase or not) because of it.
It seemed like that copy protection worked exactly how they wanted it to.
Right, which 20/20 hindsight shows was not such a bright thing to do because word got around that the game crashes a lot. It bit them in the ass in the end.
I'm going to get slammed for saying this. But this is exactly why copy protection schemes don't work and why developers shouldn't bother putting that crap in their games.
In the case of TQ, if they didn't have that silly copy protection, the people pirating their game wouldn't have gotten crashes and word of mouth about the game would have been better.
I know it sucks that people were stealing their game, but putting in copy protection that doesn't work obviously isn't helping AT ALL, so why bother? Especially when the end user experience can suffer (legitimate purchase or not) because of it.
It seemed like that copy protection worked exactly how they wanted it to.
Except those people then went around talking about how the game crashed all the time, which was bad.
And ILE didn't make SoulStorm, they co-developed it with Relic in a supporting role.
Honestly, I don't think piracy is as big as a few people think it is, but it's big enough that it hurts and then there's the dumb users and idiot reviewers that don't help anything. I just hate people so much.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not condoning piracy at all but I think this just goes to show that, while it is a problem, DRM is not the way to deal with it (if it did indeed hurt Titan Quest's sales that much).
Thats an amusing stream of epic rage, there. I vote cookie.
The fellow seems to be under the mistaken impression that torrenting a game means that someone intends to actually play it. Its more of a "This costs a lot of money to try. If it were a console game hypothetical torentee could rent it, but hypothetical torentee can't. Ah well. Download. *clicky* Meh. Next, says hypothetical torentee." thing. If the game is easily accessible and makes you feel good about snagging it, it will sell. That means publicity, that means good will.
*waves at the foaming horde with his titan quest coaster*
I'm going to get slammed for saying this. But this is exactly why copy protection schemes don't work and why developers shouldn't bother putting that crap in their games.
In the case of TQ, if they didn't have that silly copy protection, the people pirating their game wouldn't have gotten crashes and word of mouth about the game would have been better.
I know it sucks that people were stealing their game, but putting in copy protection that doesn't work obviously isn't helping AT ALL, so why bother? Especially when the end user experience can suffer (legitimate purchase or not) because of it.
It seemed like that copy protection worked exactly how they wanted it to.
Except those people then went around talking about how the game crashed all the time, which was bad.
And ILE didn't make SoulStorm, they co-developed it with Relic in a supporting role.
Well lets be fair. I think it's safe to say it wasn't just copy protection, or just advertising, or just one single thing that killed them. It was a lot of somewhat small issues that piled up.
randombattle on
I never asked for this!
0
Options
Zen VulgarityWhat a lovely day for teaSecret British ThreadRegistered Userregular
edited February 2008
It's odd that there also exists games with very minimal anti-pirating checks on the game like Sins that do very well and seem fairly optimized for their scale.
I'm going to get slammed for saying this. But this is exactly why copy protection schemes don't work and why developers shouldn't bother putting that crap in their games.
In the case of TQ, if they didn't have that silly copy protection, the people pirating their game wouldn't have gotten crashes and word of mouth about the game would have been better.
I know it sucks that people were stealing their game, but putting in copy protection that doesn't work obviously isn't helping AT ALL, so why bother? Especially when the end user experience can suffer (legitimate purchase or not) because of it.
It seemed like that copy protection worked exactly how they wanted it to.
Except those people then went around talking about how the game crashed all the time, which was bad.
And ILE didn't make SoulStorm, they co-developed it with Relic in a supporting role.
I hear about games without copy protection doing well and I never hear about them doing bad. Is that just because they don't talk about them when they fail or what?
He didn't mention anything about the rubberbanding effect introduced by the expansion. Which, 3 computers later, I still encounter like clockwork. It was all over the support forums too.
TQ failed because it didn't have closed online play, imho.
I understand his frustration, but there will always be stupid people. No amount of bitching or moaning will change that.
IMO, they made a mistake putting the copy protection in the game. The game was still pirated, despite the protection, and it gave the game bad word of mouth. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like he recognized this.
IMO, they made a mistake putting the copy protection in the game. The game was still pirated, despite the protection, and it gave the game bad word of mouth. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like he recognized this.
How did he not recognize that? You just summed up his exact sentiment.
Personally, I'm surprised and delighted to see a game company rep talk openly about how frustrating the whole thing is. Even if you don't agree with everything he says, it still beats the shit out of all the PR bullshit so many of them are forced to spew and all the reviewer-coddling and doublespeak and shit. This is a guy that obviously cared about the company, and he's upset that it had to be killed like this. I'd probably do the same thing.
They try to make their game un-stealable, people steal it anyway (of course), and it's somehow their fault that the the pirates spread the word that their pirated game won't work? Truly mind-bottling.
This really sucks. Titan Quest is a great game. If any of you guys are reading, best of luck in your job search.
Honestly, I don't think piracy is as big as a few people think it is, but it's big enough that it hurts and then there's the dumb users and idiot reviewers that don't help anything. I just hate people so much.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not condoning piracy at all but I think this just goes to show that, while it is a problem, DRM is not the way to deal with it (if it did indeed hurt Titan Quest's sales that much).
t Goomba: Having seen rough numbers on Call of Duty 4 and now Titan Quest, I'd say the problem is much bigger than most people realize.
t tofu: In the same vein, I'd argue that the only solution is stronger DRM.
At the risk of derailing: I think companies are truly going against this pirating thing in absolutely the wrong way. The solution is not DRM--pirates always break it anyway, and it only ends up hurting paying customers. The solution is to make pirating difficult by getting rid of the numerous easy sources from which people download things. Bring lawsuits against Torrent site owners; even if you can't win, at least make them pay out the ear in legal fees in an attempt to shut them down. Lobby Congress to do something about it. Crack down on any high-traffic place that hosts or points people towards illegal software downloads.
The whole industry should be working together on this and making it one of their top priorities. Don't know why it's gone on this long. Software piracy will never be eliminated completely, but it can definitely be pushed back into the underground--the reason people pirate instead of buying is because it's just so damn easy these days.
OremLK on
My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
I don't think a strongly-regulated Internet is an adequate alternative to uncrackable DRM. The legal issues are thorny and globalization makes enforcement essentially impossible.
If you own an electronics store and people keep breaking in and stealing TVs, would you expect better results from:
1) Tasking the police with tracking down the group of people selling your stolen merchandise so that other prospective thieves will know you mean business, or
2) Putting better locks on the doors and bars on the windows?
Ideally you'd take both courses of action but number 2 is going to keep more TVs from walking out your door. I'm not saying perfect DRM is the best or easiest solution but it's probably going to be the one that most effectively combats piracy.
They try to make their game un-stealable, people steal it anyway (of course), and it's somehow their fault that the the pirates spread the word that their pirated game won't work? Truly mind-bottling.
This really sucks. Titan Quest is a great game. If any of you guys are reading, best of luck in your job search.
Honestly, I don't think piracy is as big as a few people think it is, but it's big enough that it hurts and then there's the dumb users and idiot reviewers that don't help anything. I just hate people so much.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not condoning piracy at all but I think this just goes to show that, while it is a problem, DRM is not the way to deal with it (if it did indeed hurt Titan Quest's sales that much).
t Goomba: Having seen rough numbers on Call of Duty 4 and now Titan Quest, I'd say the problem is much bigger than most people realize.
t tofu: In the same vein, I'd argue that the only solution is stronger DRM.
And I'd argue that stronger DRM hurts the paying consumer much more often than it does the pirate who downloads the game stripped of copy protection.
I don't think a strongly-regulated Internet is an adequate alternative to uncrackable DRM. The legal issues are thorny and globalization makes enforcement essentially impossible.
If you own an electronics store and people keep breaking in and stealing TVs, would you expect better results from:
1) Tasking the police with tracking down the group of people selling your stolen merchandise so that other prospective thieves will know you mean business, or
2) Putting better locks on the doors and bars on the windows?
Ideally you'd take both courses of action but number 2 is going to keep more TVs from walking out your door. I'm not saying perfect DRM is the best or easiest solution but it's probably going to be the one that most effectively combats piracy.
I don't think this is the same issue as protecting physical goods from theft; it's virtually impossible to protect software in the same you can protect physical goods.
I don't believe in strongly regulating the internet at large so much as shutting down the specific people who are blatantly making their living off of distributing other people's stolen software. I know it's impossible to enforce completely, but I do believe we can make life difficult for the pirates and drive them back into the underground.
Would you move to Russia in order to keep offering pirated software? I wouldn't. I'd just get a real job.
OremLK on
My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
The best way to make a PC game unstealable these days is to make it not worth it. Turn it into an MMO. Sure people can steal wow but pirated servers suck balls.
Of course the vast majority of MMO's are boring clickfests designed to turn you into zombies, but there you have it.
It's too late to reply coherently but I wonder what percentage of consumers are unduly inconvenienced by copy protection. I've literally never, in my 20+ years of PC gaming, had copy protection keep me from playing a game I bought at retail (or on Steam, for that matter).
Well, no, that's not true. I did lose the code wheel for Secrets of the Silver Blades once, but I found it the next day.
I don't think this is the same issue as protecting physical goods from theft; it's virtually impossible to protect software in the same you can protect physical goods.
I had a whole big thing typed up but I don't want to wander too far off topic. If someone wants to start (another) software piracy discussion thread in light of this new data, I'll be all over it.
IMO DRM and copy protection will not do anything to stop or slow down piracy. I think its been proven time and time again that as soon as some new copy protection comes out it gets cracked and becomes a non-issue for pirates. I mean, it only takes one person to crack the copy protection of one copy and its done. EDIT: I also think that the increasing speeds of home internet connections and the low price of storage aren't helping the problem either. If anything has slowed down piracy I would think its the size of the games now. I mean, when you have a game that spans one or mover DVDs you're talking about a considerable invest of time where your bandwidth would be eaten up from trying to download the software. But of course now with FIOS and the like that won't be a problem for pirates much longer.
Also, as far as the comment about someone moving to Russia to make money from pirating games. I'd have to say 1) I'm pretty sure the majority of people who actually make some kind of money by distributing pirated software probably all ready live in a country where copy write and IP laws aren't really inforced and 2) I don't really think people are into piracy to make money. Having to pay for a pirated piece of software would kind of defeat the purpose. They just crack the stuff for "cred" or to "stick it to the man" or what ever enjoyment they get from it and pass it out for free.
I can understand the developers position that they have to do something, they just can't sit there and watch their work be stolen but I just can't see DRM providing a good return on the investment. The only way I could see DRM working is if some kind of standard was developed between hardware and software manufactures, but we know that wont happen as I 'm sure it would be a clusterfuck of incompatibilities and result in making the end user flash their firmware to update the DRM... etc.. I'm rambling now so I'll stop.
LittleBoots on
Tofu wrote: Here be Littleboots, destroyer of threads and master of drunkposting.
Honestly, I know it's probably going to blow up in our faces, but here's hoping that the PCGA gets that hardware bullshit worked out.
Is there a word for "as unlikely as a giant meteor skimming the earth's atmosphere and removing all the excess greenhouse gasses whilst simultaneously casuing no harm and resulting in random freak showers of diamonds for the next ten years"?
It's too late to reply coherently but I wonder what percentage of consumers are unduly inconvenienced by copy protection. I've literally never, in my 20+ years of PC gaming, had copy protection keep me from playing a game I bought at retail (or on Steam, for that matter).
And I've had my computer thoroughly fucked by Starforce. My CD drive (this was before DVD) couldn't read discs any longer.
It's too late to reply coherently but I wonder what percentage of consumers are unduly inconvenienced by copy protection. I've literally never, in my 20+ years of PC gaming, had copy protection keep me from playing a game I bought at retail (or on Steam, for that matter).
I've had it several times, most recently with the Starforce protection on Prince of Persia: Two Thrones. And no, I don't have an drive emulators like Daemon tools or similar, Vista simply won't allow Starforce to run because it's software that attempts to modify your drivers and act as an intermediary between the hardware and the OS. Which is usually recognised as the behaviour of malware (hence Vista not letting it run), but when it comes to copy protection, it's A-OK to do.
Of course, anecdotal evidence, either yours or mine, doesn't really mean much.
Even if copy protection stuff wasn't harmful (which I know it to be in certain circumstances) it is a nuisance. There is flat out no excuse for punishing legitimate customers because other people infringe your copyright.
Even if copy protection stuff wasn't harmful (which I know it to be in certain circumstances) it is a nuisance. There is flat out no excuse for punishing legitimate customers because other people infringe your copyright.
Bioshock's two install limit comes to mind. Yes you can uninstall it and re-claim that install, but all it takes is a format or incorrect uninstall to lose one of them.
Even if copy protection stuff wasn't harmful (which I know it to be in certain circumstances) it is a nuisance. There is flat out no excuse for punishing legitimate customers because other people infringe your copyright.
Yes, but on the flip side. Who is going to invest money in your company to develop a product that can be easily stolen. I kind of believe copy protection is just tacked on so at least they can say they tried. I doubt any of them actually believe its going to do a damn thing.
I do agree with you though 100%. Just bored and playing devils advocate, kinda.
LittleBoots on
Tofu wrote: Here be Littleboots, destroyer of threads and master of drunkposting.
Even if copy protection stuff wasn't harmful (which I know it to be in certain circumstances) it is a nuisance. There is flat out no excuse for punishing legitimate customers because other people infringe your copyright.
Bioshock's two install limit comes to mind. Yes you can uninstall it and re-claim that install, but all it takes is a format or incorrect uninstall to lose one of them.
Yes, but on the flip side. Who is going to invest money in your company to develop a product that can be easily stolen. I kind of believe copy protection is just tacked on so at least they can say they tried. I doubt any of them actually believe its going to do a damn thing.
I do agree with you though 100%. Just bored and playing devils advocate, kinda.
Only someone ignorant to the Video Games industry would be satisfied with the DRM that most games have, since pretty much all games are cracked and piratable around launch, regardless of the nature of the DRM. If they are doing stuff just to "say they tried" then they should stop and start doing stuff to serve their customers.
There are quite a few companies that released no-cd/DRM stripping patches a few years down the road.
Even Steam has a contingency plan that lets them strip their DRM off stuff you've bought so you're not left hanging in the event that Steam/Valve goes tits up.
Even if copy protection stuff wasn't harmful (which I know it to be in certain circumstances) it is a nuisance. There is flat out no excuse for punishing legitimate customers because other people infringe your copyright.
Yes, but on the flip side. Who is going to invest money in your company to develop a product that can be easily stolen. I kind of believe copy protection is just tacked on so at least they can say they tried. I doubt any of them actually believe its going to do a damn thing.
I do agree with you though 100%. Just bored and playing devils advocate, kinda.
Well if we're playing Devils Advocate here:
I saw an article at IGN about how PC developers are blaming piracy as the reason some high profile games aren't selling in the quantities they should. As some of you know, Company A's "main" business is in the PC software realm so we have a bit different outlook on market dynamics. Here's the deal: Piracy is a problem, no doubt about it. It does cost sales. But it isn't the driving reason for lost sales, it's the size of the market. Game is outselling some higher profile games not just because it's a "great game" but because it runs on a vastly larger number of PCs.
For console advocates out there, ask yourself how well a given game would sell if it required players to run out and buy a $300 upgrade to their console to play the game? That's essentially what a lot of high profile PC game developers expect. When Company B and Company A were working on Game, we made a conscious decision that the game would not require potential gamers to upgrade their systems. That meant we couldn't have things like moving turrets or whatever but it means that the size of the market was much larger. No matter how good your game is, if people can't play it, you will always be limited. The number of people willing to upgrade PCs for games is not that large. If you want to sell lots of copies of your PC game, make sure it runs on a lot of machines.
Who said that and why should we care? Is it something someone said years ago when piracy wasn't really as much of an issue as it is today, or more recently? Is it a massive corporation that can afford to absorb losses from piracy, or an indie outfit that's selling crap numbers to a niche market where piracy isn't as much of an issue? Or something else altogether? Answer those questions in your head before checking the spoiler.
Post is by a Stardock dev on the SoaSE website.
Company A = Stardock , publisher and helped with development Company B = Ironclad games, made the game Game = Sins of a Solar Empire, the game
Stardock have stated that they do not want to put DRM on their games because it doesn't do any actual good. So they don't.
In terms of the PC charts the game is currently in the number 1 slot, outselling CoD4 (this is excluding digital downloads). That's according to recent numbers released by GamaSutra. It also sold more units in a week than GalCiv II did in its first month, and that was a fairly significant chart topper back when it was released as well.
I saw an article at IGN about how PC developers are blaming piracy as the reason some high profile games aren't selling in the quantities they should. As some of you know, Stardock's "main" business is in the PC software realm so we have a bit different outlook on market dynamics. Here's the deal: Piracy is a problem, no doubt about it. It does cost sales. But it isn't the driving reason for lost sales, it's the size of the market. Sins of a Solar Empire is outselling some higher profile games not just because it's a "great game" but because it runs on a vastly larger number of PCs.
For console advocates out there, ask yourself how well a given game would sell if it required players to run out and buy a $300 upgrade to their console to play the game? That's essentially what a lot of high profile PC game developers expect. When Ironclad and Stardock were working on Sins, we made a conscious decision that the game would not require potential gamers to upgrade their systems. That meant we couldn't have things like moving turrets or whatever but it means that the size of the market was much larger. No matter how good your game is, if people can't play it, you will always be limited. The number of people willing to upgrade PCs for games is not that large. If you want to sell lots of copies of your PC game, make sure it runs on a lot of machines.
And before anyone starts attacking my post saying "ZOMG he's just like the rest of the idiots who defend piracy and castigate everyone else", that's not what I'm saying you prat. Piracy is an issue, definitely, but it sure as heck isn't the only one, and I'd argue that there are far more significant factors at work here preventing people from purchasing your game. As it is, it's impossible to tell how significant the effect of piracy ever is because it's the same reason that's given every time when a game doesn't do as well as the devs thought it should. Doesn't matter how crap the product was, piracy was always the reason. I don't want to dismiss piracy as a factor, or as even the factor, but it sure as heck shouldn't be a be-all-and-end-all scapegoat either, which it currently is. As a result you get more and more ridiculous DRM schemes menant to limit piracy which fundamentally do nothing to stop it, and only inconvenience people who actually paid you for the privilige of playing the game. All that does is cloud the issue more.
I think that if the devs took 1 extra step and threw up a notice window saying something along the lines of "You appear to be using a illegitimate copy. Please purchase a code from our site" instead of kicking the user out everytime then there's be less complaints of mysterious random crashing.
Of course that would give the pirates a clue to how the checks work (and so circumvent it eventually) but at least the bad press would simmer down.
Also, as far as the comment about someone moving to Russia to make money from pirating games. I'd have to say 1) I'm pretty sure the majority of people who actually make some kind of money by distributing pirated software probably all ready live in a country where copy write and IP laws aren't really inforced and 2) I don't really think people are into piracy to make money. Having to pay for a pirated piece of software would kind of defeat the purpose. They just crack the stuff for "cred" or to "stick it to the man" or what ever enjoyment they get from it and pass it out for free.
I don't know for sure about where the pirates live, but I'm willing to bet there are at least a fair number who live in developed, Western countries--if anything, they might have their servers elsewhere.
As for them doing it to make money? Absolutely, they definitely are. Not the crackers, and maybe not the lesser-used venues like IRC or Usenet, but the most popular places--torrent search engines--oh yes. Have you ever seen a torrent site? Why do you think they're so loaded with ads? They get paid by CPM, and I'd be willing to bet that the bigger sites (the ones I'd most like to see shut down) get a lot of impressions.
Another thing I'd like to see developers and publishers strike at is these advertising companies that support torrent sites. Scum of earth, the lot of them.
OremLK on
My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
The Black HunterThe key is a minimum of compromise, and a simple,unimpeachable reason to existRegistered Userregular
edited February 2008
over the internet, on low quality recordings.
Studio time isnt cheap
I cant remember where it was, but I remember someone showing just how amazingly hard record labels have it. For every success there are three flops, that is why CDs cost so much money, and why alot of bands are missing out. If more people bought their music, then there'd be more money for investing in new artists, and even the price of CDs would go down.
He didn't mention anything about the rubberbanding effect introduced by the expansion. Which, 3 computers later, I still encounter like clockwork. It was all over the support forums too.
TQ failed because it didn't have closed online play, imho.
I kinda agree here. There wil never be a Diablo-clone that's better than Diablo unless the developers and publishers are willing to invest money in at least a little bit of infrastructure. Blizzard had great foresight to do this.
Posts
Right, which 20/20 hindsight shows was not such a bright thing to do because word got around that the game crashes a lot. It bit them in the ass in the end.
And ILE didn't make SoulStorm, they co-developed it with Relic in a supporting role.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not condoning piracy at all but I think this just goes to show that, while it is a problem, DRM is not the way to deal with it (if it did indeed hurt Titan Quest's sales that much).
The fellow seems to be under the mistaken impression that torrenting a game means that someone intends to actually play it. Its more of a "This costs a lot of money to try. If it were a console game hypothetical torentee could rent it, but hypothetical torentee can't. Ah well. Download. *clicky* Meh. Next, says hypothetical torentee." thing. If the game is easily accessible and makes you feel good about snagging it, it will sell. That means publicity, that means good will.
*waves at the foaming horde with his titan quest coaster*
-edit- Point stands, verily.
Actually they did a lot of the work. Like most of it. http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?p=2833276#post2833276
I mean hell, C&C games would make you think you defeated it, then at a random interval make all of your units explode into fireballs.
I never asked for this!
I think they're the minority, though.
I hear about games without copy protection doing well and I never hear about them doing bad. Is that just because they don't talk about them when they fail or what?
TQ failed because it didn't have closed online play, imho.
Currently playing: GW2 and TSW
IMO, they made a mistake putting the copy protection in the game. The game was still pirated, despite the protection, and it gave the game bad word of mouth. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like he recognized this.
Personally, I'm surprised and delighted to see a game company rep talk openly about how frustrating the whole thing is. Even if you don't agree with everything he says, it still beats the shit out of all the PR bullshit so many of them are forced to spew and all the reviewer-coddling and doublespeak and shit. This is a guy that obviously cared about the company, and he's upset that it had to be killed like this. I'd probably do the same thing.
This really sucks. Titan Quest is a great game. If any of you guys are reading, best of luck in your job search.
t Goomba: Having seen rough numbers on Call of Duty 4 and now Titan Quest, I'd say the problem is much bigger than most people realize.
t tofu: In the same vein, I'd argue that the only solution is stronger DRM.
The whole industry should be working together on this and making it one of their top priorities. Don't know why it's gone on this long. Software piracy will never be eliminated completely, but it can definitely be pushed back into the underground--the reason people pirate instead of buying is because it's just so damn easy these days.
If you own an electronics store and people keep breaking in and stealing TVs, would you expect better results from:
1) Tasking the police with tracking down the group of people selling your stolen merchandise so that other prospective thieves will know you mean business, or
2) Putting better locks on the doors and bars on the windows?
Ideally you'd take both courses of action but number 2 is going to keep more TVs from walking out your door. I'm not saying perfect DRM is the best or easiest solution but it's probably going to be the one that most effectively combats piracy.
And I'd argue that stronger DRM hurts the paying consumer much more often than it does the pirate who downloads the game stripped of copy protection.
I don't think this is the same issue as protecting physical goods from theft; it's virtually impossible to protect software in the same you can protect physical goods.
I don't believe in strongly regulating the internet at large so much as shutting down the specific people who are blatantly making their living off of distributing other people's stolen software. I know it's impossible to enforce completely, but I do believe we can make life difficult for the pirates and drive them back into the underground.
Would you move to Russia in order to keep offering pirated software? I wouldn't. I'd just get a real job.
Of course the vast majority of MMO's are boring clickfests designed to turn you into zombies, but there you have it.
Well, no, that's not true. I did lose the code wheel for Secrets of the Silver Blades once, but I found it the next day.
I stand by my TV store analogy. ;-)
I had a whole big thing typed up but I don't want to wander too far off topic. If someone wants to start (another) software piracy discussion thread in light of this new data, I'll be all over it.
ILE closing is sad.
Also, as far as the comment about someone moving to Russia to make money from pirating games. I'd have to say 1) I'm pretty sure the majority of people who actually make some kind of money by distributing pirated software probably all ready live in a country where copy write and IP laws aren't really inforced and 2) I don't really think people are into piracy to make money. Having to pay for a pirated piece of software would kind of defeat the purpose. They just crack the stuff for "cred" or to "stick it to the man" or what ever enjoyment they get from it and pass it out for free.
I can understand the developers position that they have to do something, they just can't sit there and watch their work be stolen but I just can't see DRM providing a good return on the investment. The only way I could see DRM working is if some kind of standard was developed between hardware and software manufactures, but we know that wont happen as I 'm sure it would be a clusterfuck of incompatibilities and result in making the end user flash their firmware to update the DRM... etc.. I'm rambling now so I'll stop.
Tofu wrote: Here be Littleboots, destroyer of threads and master of drunkposting.
Is there a word for "as unlikely as a giant meteor skimming the earth's atmosphere and removing all the excess greenhouse gasses whilst simultaneously casuing no harm and resulting in random freak showers of diamonds for the next ten years"?
Like what? There are already laws against copyright infringement.
Or maybe you want pirates to have the same jail time as murderers?
Oh wait, some of them already do.
And I've had my computer thoroughly fucked by Starforce. My CD drive (this was before DVD) couldn't read discs any longer.
I've had it several times, most recently with the Starforce protection on Prince of Persia: Two Thrones. And no, I don't have an drive emulators like Daemon tools or similar, Vista simply won't allow Starforce to run because it's software that attempts to modify your drivers and act as an intermediary between the hardware and the OS. Which is usually recognised as the behaviour of malware (hence Vista not letting it run), but when it comes to copy protection, it's A-OK to do.
Of course, anecdotal evidence, either yours or mine, doesn't really mean much.
EDIT: Same complaint at the same time.
Bioshock's two install limit comes to mind. Yes you can uninstall it and re-claim that install, but all it takes is a format or incorrect uninstall to lose one of them.
Yes, but on the flip side. Who is going to invest money in your company to develop a product that can be easily stolen. I kind of believe copy protection is just tacked on so at least they can say they tried. I doubt any of them actually believe its going to do a damn thing.
I do agree with you though 100%. Just bored and playing devils advocate, kinda.
Tofu wrote: Here be Littleboots, destroyer of threads and master of drunkposting.
Yup.
Only someone ignorant to the Video Games industry would be satisfied with the DRM that most games have, since pretty much all games are cracked and piratable around launch, regardless of the nature of the DRM. If they are doing stuff just to "say they tried" then they should stop and start doing stuff to serve their customers.
Even Steam has a contingency plan that lets them strip their DRM off stuff you've bought so you're not left hanging in the event that Steam/Valve goes tits up.
Well if we're playing Devils Advocate here:
Who said that and why should we care? Is it something someone said years ago when piracy wasn't really as much of an issue as it is today, or more recently? Is it a massive corporation that can afford to absorb losses from piracy, or an indie outfit that's selling crap numbers to a niche market where piracy isn't as much of an issue? Or something else altogether? Answer those questions in your head before checking the spoiler.
Company A = Stardock , publisher and helped with development
Company B = Ironclad games, made the game
Game = Sins of a Solar Empire, the game
Stardock have stated that they do not want to put DRM on their games because it doesn't do any actual good. So they don't.
In terms of the PC charts the game is currently in the number 1 slot, outselling CoD4 (this is excluding digital downloads). That's according to recent numbers released by GamaSutra. It also sold more units in a week than GalCiv II did in its first month, and that was a fairly significant chart topper back when it was released as well.
And before anyone starts attacking my post saying "ZOMG he's just like the rest of the idiots who defend piracy and castigate everyone else", that's not what I'm saying you prat. Piracy is an issue, definitely, but it sure as heck isn't the only one, and I'd argue that there are far more significant factors at work here preventing people from purchasing your game. As it is, it's impossible to tell how significant the effect of piracy ever is because it's the same reason that's given every time when a game doesn't do as well as the devs thought it should. Doesn't matter how crap the product was, piracy was always the reason. I don't want to dismiss piracy as a factor, or as even the factor, but it sure as heck shouldn't be a be-all-and-end-all scapegoat either, which it currently is. As a result you get more and more ridiculous DRM schemes menant to limit piracy which fundamentally do nothing to stop it, and only inconvenience people who actually paid you for the privilige of playing the game. All that does is cloud the issue more.
Of course that would give the pirates a clue to how the checks work (and so circumvent it eventually) but at least the bad press would simmer down.
I don't know for sure about where the pirates live, but I'm willing to bet there are at least a fair number who live in developed, Western countries--if anything, they might have their servers elsewhere.
As for them doing it to make money? Absolutely, they definitely are. Not the crackers, and maybe not the lesser-used venues like IRC or Usenet, but the most popular places--torrent search engines--oh yes. Have you ever seen a torrent site? Why do you think they're so loaded with ads? They get paid by CPM, and I'd be willing to bet that the bigger sites (the ones I'd most like to see shut down) get a lot of impressions.
Another thing I'd like to see developers and publishers strike at is these advertising companies that support torrent sites. Scum of earth, the lot of them.
This.
I would also love to see more legal only torrent services.
if more people did it, there would be more bands, bands would stay around longer, CD's would cost less etc etc.
same with games
This is not strictly true.
More so than games, the entire music industry could collapse tomorrow, and there would still be lots of fantastic music.
Studio time isnt cheap
I cant remember where it was, but I remember someone showing just how amazingly hard record labels have it. For every success there are three flops, that is why CDs cost so much money, and why alot of bands are missing out. If more people bought their music, then there'd be more money for investing in new artists, and even the price of CDs would go down.
I kinda agree here. There wil never be a Diablo-clone that's better than Diablo unless the developers and publishers are willing to invest money in at least a little bit of infrastructure. Blizzard had great foresight to do this.