Hormalakh

Those two things are about as far apart as you can get. There are no effective and unobtrusive DRMs, and the reason Starforce worked so well was because it was anything but unobtrusive. On top of that the amount of absolute hatred (as well valid concerns about computer security) that Starforce generates would cost P:E FAR more sales than would be gained from pirates purchasing the game. You asked for an example, I gave you one. Starforce was cracked a long time ago. Though it did hold up for awhile. It also is the kind of DRM (malware/spyware whathaveyou) that I would refuse to buy a game over, no matter how good the game was. Ubisoft has never made a game that interested me though, so I didn't miss out on anything. Starforce is apparently still being used in Russia. The article does a much better job than I could in addressing your concern about it being spyware and computer security. To sum it up, the claims have been exaggerated. I would recommend both of you to read it. But like I said, I only care about P:E. The idea that the DRM lost a lot of goodwill among gamers however is addressed, partially in my OP. It would be OEI's responsibility to consider whether the backlash (and financial costs) against a DRM like that would be worth the gains in game sales. I don't think so. But there must be an answer that most people would be happy with. At the same time, we shouldn't allow our emotions to get the better of us and declare all DRMs worthless or spyware. There is a lot for all of us to learn, and I believe that the discussion should be one where informed comments are given precedence.

The article I linked to has it:

This is another way to look at it- if you are a backer, you can look at it this way. I am also a backer, and I look at it differently. I "don't worry" about the sequel as much as I "worry" about the expansion. The bigger concern is to show publishers through sales information that games like this still do sell. Obsidian isn't the only developer making PC-only games. A lot of indies are being made and being funded through kickstarter. Clearly there is a market for PC-only games.

There are DRMs that stay uncracked for years. They exist. These DRMs, perhaps with the caveats I stated, can be effective barriers to a significant amount of piracy. Other than DRMs, there are other copyright protections that could be taken (someone else posted about this in this thread) to reduce piracy.

Oh God...we're gonna start having analogies now... Before we go on, I want to state that I care only about P:E. The question here is specific and we're not dealing with a vague idea, thus the examples should be relevant to P:E. If a pirate wasn't going to buy the game regardless of copyright protection, no amount of pleading/DRM/CP protection will dissuade him. But for those who would purchase the game if there wasn't a "free" copy for them to steal, I would argue that yes many of them would be deterred by buying it. Reasons for buying might be to play the game when it first comes out (day-0/day-1 piracy), not having to deal with cracks or hunting for them on DRMs, etc. These are the pirates that I worry about. The numbers aren't known, but they are not 0. Even a 1% (hopefully more) conversion of these pirates to possible customers can be the difference between sufficient revenue for a good or a bad/buggy expansion. This is because, as stated in the kickstarter, we knew that the revenue would be used strictly for the development of this expansion. This is something that has been promised by the company. Now if all of a sudden I hear that the revenue isn't being used to fund an expansion and is being used to fund someone's beachhouse in Tahiti, then I would be upset. As for your example, allowing market forces to play their role is not what devs worry about when pirates pirate. Instead, pirates aren't following the social contract and are breaking that contract for whatever reason. The pirates that I and many devs worry about are those that would purchase the game (along with the alternative) because they would want to play that specific title. If P:E had a competitor that undercut them by making an equivalent game at half the cost, normal market forces and the public wouldn't care. The most competitive win in a fair market. But if the rules are broken, then you cannot say that the market is fair any longer and those who break those rules should be held responsible. There shouldn't be a different set of rules for the supposed "robin hoods." Edit: Clarity.

^OOtS is awesome. I am a big advocate of sharing ideas and letting reasoned discussion be the judge. I might not be the most qualified to speak about the subject however.

Apparently Russian game devs still do. Slowing down pirates is still effective. A portion of them theoretically give up and buy the game. See "Day-0 pirating and Day-1 pirating."

If this game does not sell any copies, the contract means that we do not get an expansion pack. Sales only come if the game isn't completely and utterly pirated. Pirates will actively taking funding away from myour expansion.

Dang... so many issues.

All I care about is this. I'm happy.

I don't think Obsidian is my friend or anything like that. I'm not supporting Obsidian because I love them. I'm supporting them because I benefit from it as they do. There is a contract between the backers of the game and the developers. We paid them; they promised to make a game. Until they break that bond of trust, there's no reason for me to act tactlessly and without consideration for the other party. Acting suspiciously to every action that they make would be to surrender to some weird paranoia. Look, I live in a capitalist society where money talks, but that doesn't dictate my own ethics or morals. You can talk all about how the copyright laws are a mess in your country or world-wide and how everyone is being screwed over and I would probably agree with you. But a poorly written legislation does not excuse poor ethics and morality. I don't want to make this an ethical or moral issue, but there is one to be had and one that suffices for many people. But by not engaging in a discussion about this directly, we let others do the talking for us. There is obviously more to the debate that what I've posted in the OP, but some of it is irrelevant and most of it counterproductive to the point that I was making, i.e. it leads to flame-wars. I've started this thread because I care about my own gaming experiences. The way I see it is that PC gaming sucks currently. We get crap games and hand-me-downs from the consoles. We don't get good PC-only games and we need to look in the mirror. DRMs suck, yes. But so do pirates. Now with a new kickstarter dynamic, we should have this piracy conversation before it gets all out of control.

not steam, I have a lot of problems with that application. Yep. Using only one distribution channel isn't optimal.

Oh I see what you're saying now. Well, yeah you can't really completely stop pirating: you could probably have world peace before that happens. But you can try to dissuade as many as possible. My point is to make it difficult to pirate a game. Effective, unobtrusive copyright protections can do that. But these need support from gamers. I think we're on the same page.

So copy protection is cool by you (per what the article is describing)? That's fine by me. What ever way is most effective and at lowest price to limit piracy. Piracy will happen. I don't argue that it won't. DRM isn't necessarily the right answer. But something should be done and we as gamers should be alright with it.

I disagree that piracy has hurt PC gaming's future, and future is the most important word here for me. The effect piracy or perceived piracy has had on PC gaming is indisputable. We have a shift of larger publishers to consoles, draconian DRM, and really just rage spouting from every corner. However, piracy is here. It is possible. It will not be stopped any more than any of the other crazy stuff on the internet will be stopped. And you can't expect all people to self regulate. It will not happen. If any luxury is to survive the digitial age, it has to evolve. The reason kickstarter excited me so much, and the reason you'll hear me advocating P:E moving completely over to a kickstarter model, is that this could be a way for the PC gaming industry to evolve. Let people pay for games they want upfront, before any cracking could possibly happen. Make the game, get paid exactly what the game was worth to make, then release it out into the world. No need to worry about expensive DRM or losing money to pirates. Just games people want being made for the amount of money they were actually worth. Maybe I'm being wildly idealistic, maybe I just have no idea how anything works around me. I don't know and I know I don't know. This is just what I think I see and what I'm hoping for. I understand what you're saying. PC gaming definitely has changed, and not necessarily for the better. However, I don't think PC only games should be relegated to kickstarters only or MMO F2Ps. That would mean we would never have huge PC only single-player game budgets. Deus Ex 1 would have been less likely to happen. And all these console trash games that really suck on the PC will continue.

I'm not sure I quite understand what you're trying to say. If they download any game without discretion (like let's say they're a collector), they aren't planning on playing it anyway. So this doesn't really help increase word of mouth. If they are planning on playing the game and intentionally downloaded the game from the torrent site, then they should buy it or pay the devs to help support them. Buying from Steam is buying, not piracy. If they willy-nilly torrent everything, then when they do play it, they should pay for it.

Raised to the fractional power we hover! Wait... no... Humor aside, DRM is not a bad thing, in and of itself, because it is not simply one thing. It obviously has a variety of implementations. That would be like saying metal is bad because it makes guns, which kill people. That being said, a reasonable level of DRM implementation is perfectly... well, reasonable. Entering a serial key isn't any more of a pain in the butt than waiting on your popcorn in the microwave, or logging into a website profile. Some argue that this won't do any good. Well, to that I say, have you not noticed how many people in the world do "wrong" only when it's convenient? How many people, for example, will attempt to mug someone in an alley for the money in their wallet? Now, how many people will watch someone accidentally drop 50 bucks in cash, pick it up, keep it, and say nothing? Without getting into the "What are the specific numbers for all the different types of piraters (I say 'piraters' here to distinguish from 'pirates,' which are awesome and rum-filled) and their effect on the economy in bar-graph format," I can assure you that there are far more than a handful of people who take free copies of games because they are conveniently offered to them. So, yes, this specific group of people isn't going to go out of their way to edit config files and replace .exe's with cracked ones, etc. So, for 15 seconds of key-entering and verification, you stop a group of people. I think some form of that is probably reasonable, assuming it doesn't cost 8.3 million dollars to implement. But, there's definitely no need to implement some kind of shock-and-awe nuclear winter DRM system that takes a blood sample every 30 minutes to make sure you're still you while you play the game. That, without a doubt, causes some amount of people to put even more consideration into piracy than they would have without such a hugely punishing system. Thusly, I am in favor of DRM being implemented (in a reasonable manner) on post-release copies. In addition to this simple countermeasure, I agree with other sentiments here that the best countermeasure to piracy is to basically give pirates as little basis as possible to justify their actions, or for others to see their actions as justified somehow. Some people in the world kick puppies, but how many people do you think would watch a puppy being kicked and just shrug it off? Yeah, that's because puppies are awesome and adorable. They radiate waves of unkickableness. The video game industry as a whole? Not so much. Not nearly as much as a puppy. Factors are obviously a bit different with the kickstarter process, as has been mentioned. But, going back to the mugging-vs.-money-dropping example, out of all the people who would pick up that $50 and keep it, how many do you think would do that if it was one of their best friends who dropped it? Significantly fewer, I would say. Well, developers need to make sure they promote the fact (and they must make it a fact rather than a marketing gimmick) that they're working to EARN your money, not trick you out of it. The relationship between producer and consumer shouldn't be treated like a battle, as it is a symbiotic relationship. The most successful restaurants are typically the ones that serve the best food and treat their customers well, not the ones who gimmick the most people into choosing them and charge as much as they can possibly get away with while still staying in business. Well said, except for 1 thing. I think a shock-and-awe nuclear winter DRM system would be quite exciting!

Okay, so this more of a personal revelation that you are sharing with the community than a concern that P:E will be pirated enough to really hurt the game. That's a rather large sigh of relief. I couldn't imagine it, but I do miss a lot of threads. I also did(and do) my own fair share of pirating. My thought process revolves around the 'you're stealing sales' argument. Before I pirate something ask myself whether I would ever buy it. If my answer is no, I would not buy this and if I couldn't get it for free I simply wouldn't have it, then I'll pirate it. If I enjoy it and discover that I would have bought it had I known this, then I buy it. I don't think this makes what I do morally sound, but does make it acceptable to me. No I actually do think that piracy will and has hurt PC gaming's future if people continue to not speak out. P:E specifically might also be hurt. But I can't put numbers on it. It would be folly to do so. Edit: I've added this to my previous post.

Do all Chinese and Russian players plan on pirating this game? I don't think so. I'm pretty sure some of them have backed it and others plan on buying it. Backers shouldn't enable pirates though by posting their own copies up on piratebay. China and Russia are in the top 3 countries for rates of software piracy is what I'm getting at. Well then backers shouldn't enable pirates by posting their own copies up on piratebay. That's the least we can do. That affects us because the next time OEI or another country wants to kickstart another RPG game and Russians or Chinese want localization, why should the rest of us, the backers spend the pledged money on localization for a country whose backers are not wiling to support the company but rather those that plan on stealing the game? I don't know numbers for those countries so who knows what the actual piracy rates are.

Hence the trepidation for me. But honestly, this is the internet! I'm behind 7 proxies and all that.

A good game sells regardless of pirates' word of mouth. Are you saying there's an upper ceiling on publicity and marketing because I can guarantee you that P:E wont sell as much as CoD, Starcraft, Halo, Diablo, etc. Look, if pirates want to support the developers (the actual people being paid to work to make the game), they should back the project or buy the game by paying and also talk about it to friends. Don't try to play them off as being some "bastion of goodwill" here to act as a marketing department for Obsidian's Project:Eternity. That's just false. I don't care about pirates of other games. I'm dealing with P:E specifically. That's why the thread is in the P:E forums.

Do all Chinese and Russian players plan on pirating this game? I don't think so. I'm pretty sure some of them have backed it and others plan on buying it. Backers shouldn't enable pirates though by posting their own copies up on piratebay.

Not all steam games are DRM. DRM isn't necessarily the answer. All games in your steam account have some sort drm as you can't install them without steam and you can't sell your licence forward if steam don't allow it and even then you must follow steam's rules not laws of your country. Didn't know that. I don't have Steam and will be downloading from gog.com precisely because of the DRM. Should they limit their market only by selling through steam though?

Yep I totally agree. It's a discussion the devs should obviously have with the players and backers because DRMs cost money and goodwill. DRMs aren't necessarily the answer. There are other things we can do.

I've been reading a lot of the RPGCodex lately. The article from tweakguides was posted there. I sat and read the whole thing and thought about it. I've pirated in the long long past, using the same arguments that most pirates do (I didn't use the "because I can" one - that takes serious antisocial behavior). I feel responsible somehow now that I'm starting to develop a relationship with the developers here at Obsidian. They've listened to us the best they can and I better understand where they come from. It's just a different relationship. Edit: I also do think that piracy will and has hurt PC gaming's future if people continue to not speak out. P:E specifically might also be hurt. But I can't put numbers on it. It would be folly to do so.