Hormalakh

This is called "moving the goalposts." Whenever the "objections" of pirates are met, they just say "but we meant this instead." P:E IP is not theft from the Public Domain. That's like a whole other level of delusional thinking right there. How exactly did PE steal from the public doman? By asking from forum members what they'd like to see in their game that they backed? From now on Sophos, I expect you to keep your ideas to yourself, make a game from it, and then give that game out to the public for free.

And by kickstarters rules and agreements pledgers would have right to demand their money back in case which Obsidian (or any other project creator in kickstarter) don't deliver rewards which they have promised. So taking DRM free version in this point of the table would probably be more damaging than what pirates could ever do. As some people would see that orginal offer for drm free version was only marketing ploy to get more backers for the project and they would probably cause bad press for the project and Obsidian itself, which could cause monetary lose even in the far future. Greed company digma is easy to get, but much harder to get rid off. And apparently reading is hardest of all. I specifically stated that backers would get a DRM-free version. Backers aren't the pirates here.

As a backer of this game I don't demand DRM. But I do demand other backers and Obsidian supporters to STOP the defending piracy of PE and to start saying, "Yah, piracy is an evil." My thread consisted of variable proposals to the backers and the developers. The developers so far have followed through on their part. They haven't implemented DRM and have made the game easy to access when it comes out. My issue is actually now with the backers. Why are you defending piracy for this game? How can you support a company and also come here and support piracy for PE. All I want is for people to say, "Yes, if I see someone pirating this game - which doesn't have DRM - then I will tell them to go an buy it and to stop pirating it." Community deterrence by speaking out against pirating PE and not actively putting your backed game on pirate sites is what you can do.

This thread is about P:E not any other game. For your ME example, the fact that your friends said it was amazing was the reason you went out and bought it finally. If they hadn't you wouldn't have experienced that game at all. Pirating it didn't help you make a decision. Seeing the game and experiencing it did. You could have just as easily gone to a friends house, or he could have let you borrow his copy, and you would have made that decision. It had nothing to do with piracy. Piracy didn't make that sale. Good word of mouth did.

I'm signing off for the day. I'll see you guys around. Remember, say no to .

Except Valve also suffered a huge blow to goodwill when it first came out with Steamworks. For some reason, it survived. Gamers still stuck with them. Even Valve uses DRM to some extent. So is Valve smart for using Steam? Or stupid for using DRM? I'm confused. Why the **** not? The biggest companies in the business can't stop piracy and I guarantee the money they are sinking into trying to prevent it far eclipses the ENTIRE budget P:E raised on kickstarter. DRM not only fails to prevent piracy but it costs actual sales as well by turning people off. Really? You're asking this question? You think the pirates are your friends? You think they care about how you as a person, Dream, get to enjoy your game? If you are a backer or a gamer, do you think they care that you paid for the game to be made and are taking advantage of you? You and I have had our share of arguments in other threads. If I was a pirate and was raining on your parade in other threads about how the game should be this way and it should be that way and you didn't like it, do you think I had a right as a non-buying gamer to come here on this forum and take up the developers' time to spout my ideas? Do you think it's fair that websites that will undoubtedly host torrents of P:E will make thousands of $ in ad revenue per month and won't be willing to share even a tiny portion of that money with the developers of this game? A game that you, as a buying customer, get to enjoy? The biggest companies in the business might not be able to stop piracy, but each backer here can do their fair share by saying, "**** you, pirate. I bought my game, you didn't. Go get your own."

Like I said, implementing DRM would be up to Obsidian. There have been other, more constructive ways that have been mentioned in this thread about how to reduce piracy. Those are also good efforts to take up. Just saying "well it's gonna happen, might as well let it" is not what we, as backers and gamers, should be doing.

They were not exaggerated. While I never played an Ubisoft game I am familiar with that kind of DRM. Ubisoft and Starforce aren't the only folks who tried that type of thing. It's exactly that type of DRM that got me to look for my first pirated game to begin with somewhere close to a decade ago now. I know I'm not the only person who ever got so fed up with DRM on a game they legitimately bought that they went and sought out ways on the internet to remove it. Lo and behold, there waiting to be discovered was the 'pirate' community. I read the article, though scanned the second half. I like Tweakguides, and have used his guides in the past. I learned quite a bit about nVidia forceware from him, he's got a bit to learn about piracy and copyright though. As decent an article as that one is (defintely one of the better ones I've seen), as Ink Blot already said, it totally overlooks or ignores a great many important aspects of the piracy and copyright debate. Especially some of the legal aspects of it. Piracy, copyright, intellectual property, the first sale doctrine, consumer rights, basic legal rights, and all the other things that tie into this is actually a pretty complicated subject to understand as there are so many things to consider. One could easily double this size of his article still possibly not touch all the important aspects. It is definitely not a black and white issue, and not all piracy is bad for a company. This whole thread is really a non issue though. Obsidion has already stated there will be no DRM (not including the Steam version). Will there be pirates? Yes. Should we worry about them? No. As someone else said. The best thing to do is get people you know interested in getting the game who aren't already interested or know about it. No doubt there are people who don't know about PE out there that would love to play whatever it becomes. I have you basing your evidence on nothing but your own word. I have him basing evidence on experts in the field. I am more likely to believe him until you bring expert evidence to the contrary. Read the article for the expert evidence. The second half is where he starts talking about DRM. Don't be lazy in your argument. As for all the finer "points" about copyright infringement, they have nothing to do with my post. I am referring specifically to P:E and its piracy. Issues like the first sale doctrine, basic legal rights, and consumer rights really have nothing to do with this. I want backers to stand with me against pirating P:E. If you thought that P:E or Obsidian was violating the first sale doctrine, basic legal rights or consumer rights, why aren't you speaking out about it? I am finding it quite difficult to understand why people like you are against backers standing up for their respective rights to benefit from the sale of a game. As I have spelled out before, the improvement in sales of the game directly benefits those who backed this game and future buyers of the P:E game by allowing them a richer expansion pack experience.

If I knew enough about encryption systems and DRMs I might come up with a good answer. Unforunately I am not an expert. In regards to Russia, apparently -as someone else said here- one of the biggest markets who do pirate games, I wouldn't see it as being a problem to use Starforce there for the first few months, if it made economic sense. The loss of goodwill there is minimal and the gains from reduced piracy are more likely. That is of course a decision Obsidian would have to make. If they do so, I would support them. Hampering piracy for even the first few days or weeks of sales does enough to see results. If it didn't, companies wouldn't continue to use DRM. Please read the whole OP - many of your questions have been answered in either the articles I've linked to or my own post.

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.