It means I don't get to play the game, which makes me sad, but I don't support an evil company, which makes me happy.
Seriously? What?
but it is also obviously going to prevent Y sales (and from what I'm reading here, Y is a pretty big number).
From what you read here, Y equals about five, actually. I might be exaggerating. Are you counting yourself in this number, because that might effect the results.
If *I* were writing a game, I would 100% feel comfortable publishing it without any copy protection, even with digital distribution.
Nobody is stopping you. If I were writing a game, it would have Jack Palance in it.
I used the bucket to highlight the fact that you will have decent people. You will have assholes. Then you will have the tremendous assholes that look to take away what the decent people have done because "well it should have been free in the first place and the company doesn't deserve it."
The fundamental point you are missing here is that software is not food. The product can be reproduced at zero cost - heck, pirates don't even use the company's bandwidth. The assholes have no way of taking away the fun of the paying customers -- but the company does. The assholes aren't stealing in the physical sense, since they were never going to pay in the first place. They have no direct impact on HotHead's business model, which is concerned with people who actually give them money. And apparently, that's a substantial number of people - people who paid, despite the superior pirate product being available from day one.
The fundamental basis of DRM and anti-piracy efforts is the belief that you can convert pirates to customers. Do you really think the DRM is going to convert pirates to customers?
Now, how many customers did the DRM bugs annoy? The UTF-8 bug on non-English Windows? The Linux network-settings-are-part-of-the-hardware-signature bug? People unable to get to the servers because they were behind a firewall? XBLA users blocked by region codes (not HH's fault directly, but another DRM system they bought into)? None of those bugs needed to be there, and all of them resulted in customers who are a little less happy with the product and the company, a little less likely to buy again. These are people who PAID, and HotHead/P-A are making them unhappy trying to stop the people who are never going pay. See the problem?
I have the strangest feeling, it tells me that this person is a jackass and will never agree with you.
This guy keeps coming up with more and more imbecilic scenarios wherein the "DRM" within PAA is bad.
Seriously, if there is no internet, then you are there for a reason, if you are a businessman on a plane, you should be conducting business, if you are at the beach with your family, you should be at the beach with your family.
This guy reeks of a bridge's underside, or a pre-schooler who has stumbled upon Slashdot.
I assume he also rails against Steam as loudly as possible, often going to Valve's Boston headquarters to do this.
EDIT:holy shit is his sig ironic compared to his posts.
Now, how many customers did the DRM bugs annoy? The UTF-8 bug on non-English Windows? The Linux network-settings-are-part-of-the-hardware-signature bug? People unable to get to the servers because they were behind a firewall? XBLA users blocked by region codes (not HH's fault directly, but another DRM system they bought into)? None of those bugs needed to be there, and all of them resulted in customers who are a little less happy with the product and the company, a little less likely to buy again. These are people who PAID, and HotHead/P-A are making them unhappy trying to stop the people who are never going pay. See the problem?
No. It's called good business sense. Companies need to protect their intellectual property.
Bad business is having issues and refusing to fix them, and generally snubbing your nose at your customer base. HH developers are on these forums, and on Greenhouse, posting, working with people to resolve any and all issues. They didn't push out some code and turn their backs and walk away. They are here, now, in this very thread working with people who are experiencing problems.
And as for how many people were annoyed by DRM? I bet the number of people that refuse to ever buy again due to DRM issues is less than 1/10th of a percent of total sales. In fact I'm willing to bet that there will be many more people that feel much stronger/more passion over gameplay/story/depth to the point that besides the 5-10 people on this and greenhouse, DRM really isn't a huge issue. So please, despite what you may think, you really aren't all that important in the long run.
Communist Russia is gone, you missed the boat. Sorry.
EDIT:holy shit is his sig ironic compared to his posts.
My sig?
I'm all for DRM where it is appropriate (like here). Perhaps you are confusing my posts with Aetius's.
But in any case, yes I am a jackass. I also will not agree with Aetius on his stance. In fact I'm not discussing this to try to convince him otherwise, such would be folly. But I'd prefer the only voice out there not be a negative grandstanding of ridiculous ideals that are unsupportable in the modern business world.
Do tell. I am, shall we say, intrigued, by what this could be.
Microsoft benefitted greatly from a rapid expansion of their ecosystem in the early and mid 90's. For example, when NT became a competitor to Netware, Microsoft won over many people by making NT trivial to install and "license". When it came time to install new servers, you could install NT on a few machines and get to work, or you could literally spend days obtaining Netware licenses, sticking floppies into floppy drives to verify them, and troubleshooting problems that occurred because your licensing wasn't quite right or you hadn't bought enough client licenses. It was really, really annoying, and always at the most inconvenient times, like when the CEO needed access to the file share. NT had no hard client licensing limits, and installing required no hand-holding or license-disk dances.
NT blew away Netware in just a few years, not because NT was better, but because it was easy. From my experience in several different companies at the time, copies were rampant - often there was just a single NT install disk in the company that had been used on ten or twenty (or more) servers. Every now and then companies would catch up on licensing, "getting legal", but inevitably the installations would rapidly outpace the licensing. Microsoft eventually codified this behavior into their Open Licensing program (and various other programs), and it still exists today in various forms.
This convenient overlooking of slack licensing, easy installations, and "getting legal" when it was convenient for the customer established Microsoft in every corner of business and home. It *completely* established them overseas, where pirating was the only way the vast majority of people could get Windows. Every install was and is future revenue of one sort or another - people "getting legal", or buying products that only worked on Windows, then upgrading their computers and paying for a new version of Windows because that was what they needed to run their programs. They pwned the entire ecosystem by allowing their software to be distributed essentially unchecked, and then using that as a base to leverage revenue. They know this, and it's why they behave so strangely when something threatens to make the platform irrelevant, like Java, or the Internet, or actual standards-based software.
Of course, lately, since they saturated the market, they've been trying to wring more revenue out of their existing install base. Thus, product activation, DRM in every corner of the OS, etc. But people like the way things are, and aren't really interested in being inconvenienced for Microsoft's benefit.
EDIT:holy shit is his sig ironic compared to his posts.
My sig?
I'm all for DRM where it is appropriate (like here). Perhaps you are confusing my posts with Aetius's.
But in any case, yes I am a jackass. I also will not agree with Aetius on his stance. In fact I'm not discussing this to try to convince him otherwise, such would be folly. But I'd prefer the only voice out there not be a negative grandstanding of ridiculous ideals that are unsupportable in the modern business world.
I'm pretty sure he was referring to me, though I'm not sure exactly how. And hey - having a reasoned and well-thought-out opinion doesn't make you a jackass. We disagree, and that's fine. That's what the discussion is all about.
No. It's called good business sense. Companies need to protect their intellectual property.
A company's first priority is making money, and that can involve a few things, among them a) keeping your customers happy and paying, and b) protecting your IP. I know which one I would favor if I had to choose between them. If someone paid HotHead several millions dollars to make their IP public domain, should they take the money? I mean, heck, you could keep your IP secure by not selling any software; that doesn't really help the bottom line though.
Bad business is having issues and refusing to fix them, and generally snubbing your nose at your customer base. HH developers are on these forums, and on Greenhouse, posting, working with people to resolve any and all issues. They didn't push out some code and turn their backs and walk away. They are here, now, in this very thread working with people who are experiencing problems.
Good business for HotHead is putting out good, fun games that are as bug-free as is reasonably possible. Low development costs, low support costs, and high revenue make for success. One of the easiest ways to make your software have few bugs is to make it less complex. DRM, by its very nature, is complex, and thus works against this goal. You've only to look at these forums to see the result - many, many people with problems that could have been avoided.
Good business is avoiding the bugs in the first place - low support costs and happy customers is best. Decent, honest business is fixing the bugs after they happen. Bad business is letting them fester. Decent, honest business costs more - as does developing DRM.
And as for how many people were annoyed by DRM? I bet the number of people that refuse to ever buy again due to DRM issues is less than 1/10th of a percent of total sales. In fact I'm willing to bet that there will be many more people that feel much stronger/more passion over gameplay/story/depth to the point that besides the 5-10 people on this and greenhouse, DRM really isn't a huge issue. So please, despite what you may think, you really aren't all that important in the long run.
Communist Russia is gone, you missed the boat. Sorry.
HotHead went to extreme lengths to minimize the impact of their DRM. They modified their EULA from the boilerplate, which takes some serious doing, because it's a legal document. They bent over backwards to make sure that it would not get in people's way. They spent a lot of time and money both to make it unobtrusive and to fix problems that occurred with it. I'd say it's pretty important to them, which makes it even more important to US, because whether or not we get more cool games depends on their success. I'm not important - but I care very much that HotHead stay in business and make good games, because if this one is any indication, they have a great future ahead of them.
I'm pretty sure he was referring to me, though I'm not sure exactly how. And hey - having a reasoned and well-thought-out opinion doesn't make you a jackass. We disagree, and that's fine. That's what the discussion is all about.
On that note I would like to say:
SecuROM - Total bullshit. In fact a lot of DRM is. However I still feel that it is unfeasible from a business standpoint in this market to not use some sort of copy protection. I don't like it, but I see the distinction between "necessary" and "wishful thinking".
I will completely agree I wish we could trust the human population that we didn't need something like that. However I still believe that having *some* sort of protection system in place is a necessity in this day and age. And I do feel that it does deter a lot of people from sharing the game freely.
Keeping honest people honest is a frivolous and farcical goal, much like keeping liquid water wet.
That said if you find the terms so onerous simply don't buy it, games are not a necessity. Personally,
I plan to buy it and if for some reason HotHead decides to turn off activation without a way to continue
using the game, I'll do as Tycho suggests and crack it.
HotHead as a fairly new indie developer would seem to have little interest in ticking off customers so I am
reasonably sure that HH Vlad and the others at HotHead will do what they can to help those still wanting
to use the game, or keep it for posterity , in the even that activation is turned off.
Keeping honest people honest is a frivolous and farcical goal, much like keeping liquid water wet.
This is not true. If it were security systems would not be used so extensively. Ink tags on clothing have been mentioned, electronic scanners, blatant display of cameras etc. Signs on convenience store windows stating "No more than $50 in drawer after dark".
There are many ways to keep people honest. Just having the activation key keeps a lot of people from just giving the whole damn thing to many of their friends. The fear of being caught is often the huge deciding factor in someone's morality. If you knew you could kill someone and never be caught for it, what would be stopping you?
After reading this thread all I can picture is that Professor Quirrel chap from Harry Potter tear-assing into the dining hall hollering "Troooooooooooooll! TROLL in the dungeon!!"
I take it home and install it and it falls flat because I don't have an internet connection at home.
The DRM system has failed for me.
Please post back after you contact Greenhouse and they say "sorry, you're SOL."
Because I don't think we'll be reading that post.
Hey Malcolm,
Unfortunately you will need internet access to contact our license server and authorize your license. This happens just once and after that your game will be unlocked and no longer need to contact our servers again or require internet access on your machine. You wont be able to transfer the authorization from one computer to another because the license server requests an ID from EACH computer to verify the install. Let me know if this helps and we appreciate your interest in our game.
Regards,
Zean
Greenhouse Interactive
So yeah, basically SOL. I'm sure they'd be happy to provide a refund if requested but I don't think I'll do that. I like what I've seen of the game so far and appreciate the linux support. I'm sure I'll have an internet connection at some point in the future and can play it then.
I take it home and install it and it falls flat because I don't have an internet connection at home.
The DRM system has failed for me.
It probably should be in the system requirements, however, it is in the terms of use on the Greenhouse site:
Games you download may contain a Digital Rights Management (DRM) System managed by The Greenhouse. The DRM system may communicate over the Internet with the Games in order to prevent illegal or unauthorized use. Please refer to the Privacy Policy for the types of information and details on how we manage the communication of information between the Games and the DRM system.
Yeah, I noticed that afterwards, though it only says "may" in the terms of use. They state it more clearly on their about page. Unfortunately I didn't look over things carefully enough; my previous experience buying online has been with Stardock which don't have this problem (oddly enough they have a different one for me, I can't buy stuff from work because our IP address seems to be in a block for Japan, which doesn't match my billing address).
I was in too much of a rush to buy it after trying the demo
I take it home and install it and it falls flat because I don't have an internet connection at home.
The DRM system has failed for me.
It probably should be in the system requirements, however, it is in the terms of use on the Greenhouse site:
Games you download may contain a Digital Rights Management (DRM) System managed by The Greenhouse. The DRM system may communicate over the Internet with the Games in order to prevent illegal or unauthorized use. Please refer to the Privacy Policy for the types of information and details on how we manage the communication of information between the Games and the DRM system.
Yeah, I noticed that afterwards, though it only says "may" in the terms of use. They state it more clearly on their about page. Unfortunately I didn't look over things carefully enough; my previous experience buying online has been with Stardock which don't have this problem (oddly enough they have a different one for me, I can't buy stuff from work because our IP address seems to be in a block for Japan, which doesn't match my billing address).
I was in too much of a rush to buy it after trying the demo
weren't you saying in the pelican bay glitch thread that you DID buy it at work and was unable to aurthorize it at home?
Yeah, I noticed that afterwards, though it only says "may" in the terms of use. They state it more clearly on their about page. Unfortunately I didn't look over things carefully enough; my previous experience buying online has been with Stardock which don't have this problem (oddly enough they have a different one for me, I can't buy stuff from work because our IP address seems to be in a block for Japan, which doesn't match my billing address).
I was in too much of a rush to buy it after trying the demo
weren't you saying in the pelican bay glitch thread that you DID buy it at work and was unable to aurthorize it at home?
Yeah, although the part about not being able to buy at work in the quoted post refers to Stardocks store, not playgreenhouse.com. It doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand though, I was simply rambling at that point.
I have to say I was a bit surprised that there was a dial home feature on PAA. It doesn't personally bother me, but given Tycho's very vocal disdain for DRM, I don't see how it crept into PAA.
I feel like everybody's in a rush too characterize Gabe and Tycho's opinions about DRM. Maybe I'm dense and a moron, but I don't remember Tycho taking a stand saying "100% no DRM ever". Seems like a kindof dumb thing to say, though.
I feel like everybody's in a rush too characterize Gabe and Tycho's opinions about DRM. Maybe I'm dense and a moron, but I don't remember Tycho taking a stand saying "100% no DRM ever". Seems like a kindof dumb thing to say, though.
I don't recall him ever saying no DRM at all, but he was quite vocal about making the DRM as transparent as possible. While I think Hothead did a pretty good job of this, dialing home creates problems for some people so I'm surprised he let it into his game.
Except it doesn't. The only way to get a copy of the program at all is to download it from the internet. And if you install it and activate it immediately afterwards, it should be completely impossible to find yourself unable to play the game for lack of an internet connection. Sadly, the fact of the matter in todays society is that you can't design things without making the assumption that people are going to have an internet connection.
Especially when those things are only made available through digital distribution
ESPECIALLY when you can download the installer, install it at home and use FREE dialup internet to activate the game. It's not like it's a gigantic hassle. I find it hard to believe that in a digital age people expect to download a game with zero protection for the distributor. Do you not buy DVD's at walmart because they have theft protection? While not a perfect analogy, it's essentially that easy with the game. Takes all of 10 seconds to do the verification. Are people mad because they can't install it on as many computers as they want with the same key over and over? Cry a river somewhere else, because that's just plain stupid.
They can't possibly be mad because they can't install it on all their computers, since Hothead has explicitly said that if you have more than three machines then all you have to do is send them an email. Only if they want to install it on other people's computers should this be an issue. Except that that's illegal.
Except it doesn't. The only way to get a copy of the program at all is to download it from the internet. And if you install it and activate it immediately afterwards, it should be completely impossible to find yourself unable to play the game for lack of an internet connection. Sadly, the fact of the matter in todays society is that you can't design things without making the assumption that people are going to have an internet connection.
I remember the most vocal (valid) complaint about the HL2 requirement to dial home came from military members overseas. They had family ship them the game only to find out they couldn't play it. I imagine the same type of thing happens with PAA if they send it via burned CD or thumb drive.
Again, I'm not saying it Hothead doesn't have a right to do it. I'm just saying that given Tycho's predisposition towards DRM, I was surprised when I saw it.
I remember the most vocal (valid) complaint about the HL2 requirement to dial home came from military members overseas. They had family ship them the game only to find out they couldn't play it. I imagine the same type of thing happens with PAA if they send it via burned CD or thumb drive.
Again, I'm not saying it Hothead doesn't have a right to do it. I'm just saying that given Tycho's predisposition towards DRM, I was surprised when I saw it.
Good point. They have chosen a reasonably good activation scheme though, it's at least as good as the one that Steam uses. There's only a couple of corner cases where it hasn't worked out, most people shouldn't really notice it - just like good DRM should be.
Except it doesn't. The only way to get a copy of the program at all is to download it from the internet. And if you install it and activate it immediately afterwards, it should be completely impossible to find yourself unable to play the game for lack of an internet connection. Sadly, the fact of the matter in todays society is that you can't design things without making the assumption that people are going to have an internet connection.
I remember the most vocal (valid) complaint about the HL2 requirement to dial home came from military members overseas. They had family ship them the game only to find out they couldn't play it. I imagine the same type of thing happens with PAA if they send it via burned CD or thumb drive.
Again, I'm not saying it Hothead doesn't have a right to do it. I'm just saying that given Tycho's predisposition towards [sic] DRM, I was surprised when I saw it.
And once again, I feel a little odd. If Tycho is as anti-DRM as you claim, where's the hate for Half-Life 2 and Steam? I feel like people have this mindset where if you've advocated against certain types of DRM, you're automatically against ALL types. There's lots of people in between, and given Tycho's apparent tolerance of Steam, I'm at kindof a loss to understand your logic.
Obviously after 8 pages or so and several days since the last post I'm a bit late to the party here, but here goes.
Firstly, as a semi-recent Mac convert (after a lapse since the early '90s) it's nice to see games for the Mac too.
Secondly it's nice to see developers ready to respond to customer feedback in a positive way.
I had written a 3 paragraph epic here on games I enjoyed that I couldn't play 10 years later through DRM incompatability with newer hardware, then I realised it wasn't necessary. I shall instead merely say that there are enough problems as it is playing older games because of changes in hardware without having to deal with DRM as well.
Onto my beef with the PA game. I played the demo. I enjoyed the demo (not as much as I could have, I felt, but enough to part with the relatively small amount of money to buy it). I was putting in my credit card info when I figured I'd read the terms and conditions. This made me do a bit of Googling for discussion on the DRM involved. This led me here (and other places) to inform me of the online activation component. This made me sad.
My take on the matter is this:
It doesn't matter if the game is cheap - a cheap good game is just as worthy of play down the track as an expensive good game.
It doesn't matter if the game has a DRM component (see below) - I understand the needs of companies to take some steps to dissuade (I won't say prevent, for obvious reasons) people getting the game without paying.
It DOES matter if that DRM prevents me from playing the game further down the track because an activation server no longer exists (the potential here[1]), or because my new DVD drive refuses to be abused by some DRM malware (not the case here, obviously).
The outcome:
Not buying it, sorry (and I _am_ sorry).
The moral:
Offline serial numbers, while being less secure from a copying perspective than online activation do have the benefit of being futureproof for the life of compatible hardware or emulation. I was reading an article on the history of DRM the other day, which reminded me of the old code wheels from the SSI gold box Dungeons and Dragons games (they ran on my MacPlus too!) - futureproof _and_ suitably nerdy as a bonus
I think with the transient nature of a lot of businesses on the Internet that this is a very real problem with digital distribution that needs a good solution. With a lot of software online activation doesn't matter. 10 years down the track there will be something that's bigger and better of which current functionality is a subset. The evolution of hardware combined with DRM methods that require a potentially nonexistant third party is going to mean that at some point a lot of really great games just won't work and there won't be a new game that lets you play all the of the old game and more. This makes me sad. If I'm allowed to go overboard a bit (and it's my post, so I am) I'll say that a lot of games aren't "art". Some are, and it'll be a shame to lose them even more rapidly because of a business decision.
Congratulations if you made it through the lengthy diatribe. Sorry :P
[1] - Assurances are all very well, but as has been said plenty of times, noone knows what's going to happen down the road. I'm still missing Looking Glass and Black Isle.
Zri, thanks for your perspective. That's something I'll have to consider when the next episode comes out. How can I complain that companies keep fucking me in the ass; when I hand them cash, pull down my pants, and bend over every time they tell me to?
Unfortunately if a company doesn't react to customer requests, the only available option is to stop giving them your money.
I desperately want to give HotHead and Penny Arcade more of my money; but in the face of my own views, and the existence of companies like Stardock Entertainment*, I have trouble continuing to justify that.
Here I've gone and convinced a number of friends and relatives to purchase this game, yet I have to feel guilty for financially promoting this system.
*Stardock Entertainment is an independent studio, self-publishes, uses no DRM, and is fantastically successful.
Not trying to be dramatic. I'm just one guy anyhow, not significant enough to worry about.
I'm just trying to express my frustration with DRM in a game by a group of people who I expected to abhor it as much as I do.
Ten years from now I'll try to play through again for nostalgia, be unable to authenticate to the DRM servers, and have to search for a cracked EXE. Yeah, yeah, and hundred companies say, "But, no, not our game, we'd never do that." And then, it inevitably happens.
Not trying to be dramatic. I'm just one guy anyhow, not significant enough to worry about.
I'm just trying to express my frustration with DRM in a game by a group of people who I expected to abhor it as much as I do.
Ten years from now I'll try to play through again for nostalgia, be unable to authenticate to the DRM servers, and have to search for a cracked EXE. Yeah, yeah, and hundred companies say, "But, no, not our game, we'd never do that." And then, it inevitably happens.
I think you're wrong about. Let's table this for the next ten years, shall we?
I just want to jump in and ask a question, I think this is ok since the last post was yesterday.
To the people who refuse to buy any games with DRM on them, even the relatively lenient DRM that is in this PA game:
How do you use computers? What OS do you use? If you use OSX or Windows, they're DRM protected. Do you use MS Office? DRM. Basically any decent software I can think of comes with a key of some kind. Sure, you can get free stuff for a lot of things; Open Office, AVG, Zonealarm, etc. But I feel like at some point, you need something you can't get for free and wind up using a DRM covered program.
I'm not trying to "disprove" anyone, I'm just curious how far this aversion to DRM extends. Is it only in games that you find it unacceptable?
Steam really, really, really, (did I mention really) needs to split off from Valve and become its own company. The only entity that loses in that is Valve, as they aren't raking in the money.
Bottom line is that Steam is the most successful digital distribution platform, but companies are still hesitant to join the fray because of the kinds of information Valve could potentially access, and because it's money going directly into the coffers of a potential competitor.
It's been beaten to death, but StarDock's success lies in the magnitude and the spectrum of stuff they supply.
Posts
Do tell. I am, shall we say, intrigued, by what this could be.
Steam - Talon Valdez :Blizz - Talonious#1860 : Xbox Live & LoL - Talonious Monk @TaloniousMonk Hail Satan
Seriously? What?
From what you read here, Y equals about five, actually. I might be exaggerating. Are you counting yourself in this number, because that might effect the results.
Nobody is stopping you. If I were writing a game, it would have Jack Palance in it.
The fundamental point you are missing here is that software is not food. The product can be reproduced at zero cost - heck, pirates don't even use the company's bandwidth. The assholes have no way of taking away the fun of the paying customers -- but the company does. The assholes aren't stealing in the physical sense, since they were never going to pay in the first place. They have no direct impact on HotHead's business model, which is concerned with people who actually give them money. And apparently, that's a substantial number of people - people who paid, despite the superior pirate product being available from day one.
The fundamental basis of DRM and anti-piracy efforts is the belief that you can convert pirates to customers. Do you really think the DRM is going to convert pirates to customers?
Now, how many customers did the DRM bugs annoy? The UTF-8 bug on non-English Windows? The Linux network-settings-are-part-of-the-hardware-signature bug? People unable to get to the servers because they were behind a firewall? XBLA users blocked by region codes (not HH's fault directly, but another DRM system they bought into)? None of those bugs needed to be there, and all of them resulted in customers who are a little less happy with the product and the company, a little less likely to buy again. These are people who PAID, and HotHead/P-A are making them unhappy trying to stop the people who are never going pay. See the problem?
This guy keeps coming up with more and more imbecilic scenarios wherein the "DRM" within PAA is bad.
Seriously, if there is no internet, then you are there for a reason, if you are a businessman on a plane, you should be conducting business, if you are at the beach with your family, you should be at the beach with your family.
This guy reeks of a bridge's underside, or a pre-schooler who has stumbled upon Slashdot.
I assume he also rails against Steam as loudly as possible, often going to Valve's Boston headquarters to do this.
EDIT:holy shit is his sig ironic compared to his posts.
No. It's called good business sense. Companies need to protect their intellectual property.
Bad business is having issues and refusing to fix them, and generally snubbing your nose at your customer base. HH developers are on these forums, and on Greenhouse, posting, working with people to resolve any and all issues. They didn't push out some code and turn their backs and walk away. They are here, now, in this very thread working with people who are experiencing problems.
And as for how many people were annoyed by DRM? I bet the number of people that refuse to ever buy again due to DRM issues is less than 1/10th of a percent of total sales. In fact I'm willing to bet that there will be many more people that feel much stronger/more passion over gameplay/story/depth to the point that besides the 5-10 people on this and greenhouse, DRM really isn't a huge issue. So please, despite what you may think, you really aren't all that important in the long run.
Communist Russia is gone, you missed the boat. Sorry.
My sig?
I'm all for DRM where it is appropriate (like here). Perhaps you are confusing my posts with Aetius's.
But in any case, yes I am a jackass. I also will not agree with Aetius on his stance. In fact I'm not discussing this to try to convince him otherwise, such would be folly. But I'd prefer the only voice out there not be a negative grandstanding of ridiculous ideals that are unsupportable in the modern business world.
Microsoft benefitted greatly from a rapid expansion of their ecosystem in the early and mid 90's. For example, when NT became a competitor to Netware, Microsoft won over many people by making NT trivial to install and "license". When it came time to install new servers, you could install NT on a few machines and get to work, or you could literally spend days obtaining Netware licenses, sticking floppies into floppy drives to verify them, and troubleshooting problems that occurred because your licensing wasn't quite right or you hadn't bought enough client licenses. It was really, really annoying, and always at the most inconvenient times, like when the CEO needed access to the file share. NT had no hard client licensing limits, and installing required no hand-holding or license-disk dances.
NT blew away Netware in just a few years, not because NT was better, but because it was easy. From my experience in several different companies at the time, copies were rampant - often there was just a single NT install disk in the company that had been used on ten or twenty (or more) servers. Every now and then companies would catch up on licensing, "getting legal", but inevitably the installations would rapidly outpace the licensing. Microsoft eventually codified this behavior into their Open Licensing program (and various other programs), and it still exists today in various forms.
This convenient overlooking of slack licensing, easy installations, and "getting legal" when it was convenient for the customer established Microsoft in every corner of business and home. It *completely* established them overseas, where pirating was the only way the vast majority of people could get Windows. Every install was and is future revenue of one sort or another - people "getting legal", or buying products that only worked on Windows, then upgrading their computers and paying for a new version of Windows because that was what they needed to run their programs. They pwned the entire ecosystem by allowing their software to be distributed essentially unchecked, and then using that as a base to leverage revenue. They know this, and it's why they behave so strangely when something threatens to make the platform irrelevant, like Java, or the Internet, or actual standards-based software.
Of course, lately, since they saturated the market, they've been trying to wring more revenue out of their existing install base. Thus, product activation, DRM in every corner of the OS, etc. But people like the way things are, and aren't really interested in being inconvenienced for Microsoft's benefit.
I'm pretty sure he was referring to me, though I'm not sure exactly how. And hey - having a reasoned and well-thought-out opinion doesn't make you a jackass. We disagree, and that's fine. That's what the discussion is all about.
A company's first priority is making money, and that can involve a few things, among them a) keeping your customers happy and paying, and b) protecting your IP. I know which one I would favor if I had to choose between them. If someone paid HotHead several millions dollars to make their IP public domain, should they take the money? I mean, heck, you could keep your IP secure by not selling any software; that doesn't really help the bottom line though.
Good business for HotHead is putting out good, fun games that are as bug-free as is reasonably possible. Low development costs, low support costs, and high revenue make for success. One of the easiest ways to make your software have few bugs is to make it less complex. DRM, by its very nature, is complex, and thus works against this goal. You've only to look at these forums to see the result - many, many people with problems that could have been avoided.
Good business is avoiding the bugs in the first place - low support costs and happy customers is best. Decent, honest business is fixing the bugs after they happen. Bad business is letting them fester. Decent, honest business costs more - as does developing DRM.
HotHead went to extreme lengths to minimize the impact of their DRM. They modified their EULA from the boilerplate, which takes some serious doing, because it's a legal document. They bent over backwards to make sure that it would not get in people's way. They spent a lot of time and money both to make it unobtrusive and to fix problems that occurred with it. I'd say it's pretty important to them, which makes it even more important to US, because whether or not we get more cool games depends on their success. I'm not important - but I care very much that HotHead stay in business and make good games, because if this one is any indication, they have a great future ahead of them.
On that note I would like to say:
SecuROM - Total bullshit. In fact a lot of DRM is. However I still feel that it is unfeasible from a business standpoint in this market to not use some sort of copy protection. I don't like it, but I see the distinction between "necessary" and "wishful thinking".
I will completely agree I wish we could trust the human population that we didn't need something like that. However I still believe that having *some* sort of protection system in place is a necessity in this day and age. And I do feel that it does deter a lot of people from sharing the game freely.
That said if you find the terms so onerous simply don't buy it, games are not a necessity. Personally,
I plan to buy it and if for some reason HotHead decides to turn off activation without a way to continue
using the game, I'll do as Tycho suggests and crack it.
HotHead as a fairly new indie developer would seem to have little interest in ticking off customers so I am
reasonably sure that HH Vlad and the others at HotHead will do what they can to help those still wanting
to use the game, or keep it for posterity
This is not true. If it were security systems would not be used so extensively. Ink tags on clothing have been mentioned, electronic scanners, blatant display of cameras etc. Signs on convenience store windows stating "No more than $50 in drawer after dark".
There are many ways to keep people honest. Just having the activation key keeps a lot of people from just giving the whole damn thing to many of their friends. The fear of being caught is often the huge deciding factor in someone's morality. If you knew you could kill someone and never be caught for it, what would be stopping you?
What a bunch of hooey.
So yeah, basically SOL. I'm sure they'd be happy to provide a refund if requested but I don't think I'll do that. I like what I've seen of the game so far and appreciate the linux support. I'm sure I'll have an internet connection at some point in the future and can play it then.
Yeah, I noticed that afterwards, though it only says "may" in the terms of use. They state it more clearly on their about page. Unfortunately I didn't look over things carefully enough; my previous experience buying online has been with Stardock which don't have this problem (oddly enough they have a different one for me, I can't buy stuff from work because our IP address seems to be in a block for Japan, which doesn't match my billing address).
I was in too much of a rush to buy it after trying the demo
weren't you saying in the pelican bay glitch thread that you DID buy it at work and was unable to aurthorize it at home?
DIRECTLY FROM THAT LINK: "One-time Internet connection required to activate"
*slow clap*
It's a recent addition.
Perhaps due to it being brought to their attention?
This is the internet you know, things change.
Yeah, although the part about not being able to buy at work in the quoted post refers to Stardocks store, not playgreenhouse.com. It doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand though, I was simply rambling at that point.
Mmmmhmmm. Right.
I don't recall him ever saying no DRM at all, but he was quite vocal about making the DRM as transparent as possible. While I think Hothead did a pretty good job of this, dialing home creates problems for some people so I'm surprised he let it into his game.
ESPECIALLY when you can download the installer, install it at home and use FREE dialup internet to activate the game. It's not like it's a gigantic hassle. I find it hard to believe that in a digital age people expect to download a game with zero protection for the distributor. Do you not buy DVD's at walmart because they have theft protection? While not a perfect analogy, it's essentially that easy with the game. Takes all of 10 seconds to do the verification. Are people mad because they can't install it on as many computers as they want with the same key over and over? Cry a river somewhere else, because that's just plain stupid.
Boy.. when I ramble I RAMBLE.
I remember the most vocal (valid) complaint about the HL2 requirement to dial home came from military members overseas. They had family ship them the game only to find out they couldn't play it. I imagine the same type of thing happens with PAA if they send it via burned CD or thumb drive.
Again, I'm not saying it Hothead doesn't have a right to do it. I'm just saying that given Tycho's predisposition towards DRM, I was surprised when I saw it.
Good point. They have chosen a reasonably good activation scheme though, it's at least as good as the one that Steam uses. There's only a couple of corner cases where it hasn't worked out, most people shouldn't really notice it - just like good DRM should be.
And once again, I feel a little odd. If Tycho is as anti-DRM as you claim, where's the hate for Half-Life 2 and Steam? I feel like people have this mindset where if you've advocated against certain types of DRM, you're automatically against ALL types. There's lots of people in between, and given Tycho's apparent tolerance of Steam, I'm at kindof a loss to understand your logic.
Firstly, as a semi-recent Mac convert (after a lapse since the early '90s) it's nice to see games for the Mac too.
Secondly it's nice to see developers ready to respond to customer feedback in a positive way.
I had written a 3 paragraph epic here on games I enjoyed that I couldn't play 10 years later through DRM incompatability with newer hardware, then I realised it wasn't necessary. I shall instead merely say that there are enough problems as it is playing older games because of changes in hardware without having to deal with DRM as well.
Onto my beef with the PA game. I played the demo. I enjoyed the demo (not as much as I could have, I felt, but enough to part with the relatively small amount of money to buy it). I was putting in my credit card info when I figured I'd read the terms and conditions. This made me do a bit of Googling for discussion on the DRM involved. This led me here (and other places) to inform me of the online activation component. This made me sad.
My take on the matter is this:
It doesn't matter if the game is cheap - a cheap good game is just as worthy of play down the track as an expensive good game.
It doesn't matter if the game has a DRM component (see below) - I understand the needs of companies to take some steps to dissuade (I won't say prevent, for obvious reasons) people getting the game without paying.
It DOES matter if that DRM prevents me from playing the game further down the track because an activation server no longer exists (the potential here[1]), or because my new DVD drive refuses to be abused by some DRM malware (not the case here, obviously).
The outcome:
Not buying it, sorry (and I _am_ sorry).
The moral:
Offline serial numbers, while being less secure from a copying perspective than online activation do have the benefit of being futureproof for the life of compatible hardware or emulation. I was reading an article on the history of DRM the other day, which reminded me of the old code wheels from the SSI gold box Dungeons and Dragons games (they ran on my MacPlus too!) - futureproof _and_ suitably nerdy as a bonus
I think with the transient nature of a lot of businesses on the Internet that this is a very real problem with digital distribution that needs a good solution. With a lot of software online activation doesn't matter. 10 years down the track there will be something that's bigger and better of which current functionality is a subset. The evolution of hardware combined with DRM methods that require a potentially nonexistant third party is going to mean that at some point a lot of really great games just won't work and there won't be a new game that lets you play all the of the old game and more. This makes me sad. If I'm allowed to go overboard a bit (and it's my post, so I am) I'll say that a lot of games aren't "art". Some are, and it'll be a shame to lose them even more rapidly because of a business decision.
Congratulations if you made it through the lengthy diatribe. Sorry :P
[1] - Assurances are all very well, but as has been said plenty of times, noone knows what's going to happen down the road. I'm still missing Looking Glass and Black Isle.
http://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/post.aspx?postid=303512
Unfortunately if a company doesn't react to customer requests, the only available option is to stop giving them your money.
I desperately want to give HotHead and Penny Arcade more of my money; but in the face of my own views, and the existence of companies like Stardock Entertainment*, I have trouble continuing to justify that.
Here I've gone and convinced a number of friends and relatives to purchase this game, yet I have to feel guilty for financially promoting this system.
*Stardock Entertainment is an independent studio, self-publishes, uses no DRM, and is fantastically successful.
I'm just trying to express my frustration with DRM in a game by a group of people who I expected to abhor it as much as I do.
Ten years from now I'll try to play through again for nostalgia, be unable to authenticate to the DRM servers, and have to search for a cracked EXE. Yeah, yeah, and hundred companies say, "But, no, not our game, we'd never do that." And then, it inevitably happens.
I think you're wrong about. Let's table this for the next ten years, shall we?
To the people who refuse to buy any games with DRM on them, even the relatively lenient DRM that is in this PA game:
How do you use computers? What OS do you use? If you use OSX or Windows, they're DRM protected. Do you use MS Office? DRM. Basically any decent software I can think of comes with a key of some kind. Sure, you can get free stuff for a lot of things; Open Office, AVG, Zonealarm, etc. But I feel like at some point, you need something you can't get for free and wind up using a DRM covered program.
I'm not trying to "disprove" anyone, I'm just curious how far this aversion to DRM extends. Is it only in games that you find it unacceptable?
http://www.impulsedriven.com/
Precipice, no DRM.
EDIT: Oh, except the one-time authentication.
@gamefacts - Totally and utterly true gaming facts on the regular!
Bottom line is that Steam is the most successful digital distribution platform, but companies are still hesitant to join the fray because of the kinds of information Valve could potentially access, and because it's money going directly into the coffers of a potential competitor.
It's been beaten to death, but StarDock's success lies in the magnitude and the spectrum of stuff they supply.