BREAKING NEWS: EX-TROIKA CRPG IN MAKING

[alanschu]

That is what I mean with MOD yes; a free 3rd party made conversion for when you actually posses the game in subject. WHY should one pay $30 for just Red Orchestra? If you buy UT2K4 (being cheaper than $30 at the moment) you can downlaod RO for free and have the FULL UT2K4 to play with too...

CS:S was also not shipped free with HL2. It was included in the Gold Package (+$) though, and sold seperate for the sellers of normal editions.... same with DoD:Source...

 

 

As I mentioned already, the only version of Half-Life 2 that didn't come with CS: Source was the barebones version from steam. The Silver and Gold both came with it, as did both retail boxes. (Actually, tiered purchase plans is another benefit, as if you only want Half-Life 2 and nothing else, that option was available to you).

 

Do I REALLY have to tell the Darwinia story yet again? And if it is not that effective why McCarthy's glorious numbers, eh?

 

Because there is confounding variables.

 

A bicycle doesn't use gas. A CD within the $50 not costs an additional $2. Same with the (aforementioned) ink and paper... Also net connection costs money. And it takes up alot more time then shopping etc.

 

A bicycle would take longer. Net connections do cost money, and if you don't have a fixed cost for bandwidth like I do, then DD is probably not for you. Same with people that still have to use dial-up modems. As for taking a lot more time...I suppose. Except that I can download the game at 3:30 AM if I want. I buy most of my DD games while I sleep. I don't see the large time investment required, when I can have the game download while I'm at school/work/sleeping. In any case, it's not like I can't do other stuff on my computer while I download it either. I was chatting it up on forums when I bought SR2.

 

But that happens currently too. It is called Indie-games.  And the devs who show they can usually are allowed to proceed (Will Wright, Peter Molyneux (who showed that he really screws up himself with Lionhead), Chris Taylor etc.)

 

I know about indie games. And I want to see MORE of them. I want to see an influx of creative talent coming into the market. As for Will Wright and whatnot, thank god these guys demonstrated their abilities prior to the explosion in development costs. Will Wright had his legacy of games to keep an extremely skeptical Electronic Arts from pulling the plug on The Sims. Thankfully, The Sims made EA so much money that EA is willing to take on Will's innovative Spore. But I'd rather Will Wright not be the only person that has creative freedom in the industry. Will has also been very vocal that stagnation is all too common in this industry because of the rising development costs.

 

I'd rather Feargus not have to rely on a "slam-dunk" to get Obsidian some money so that they have a bit more influence with publishers to start publishing their own IP.

 

And on the "just buy it when it is cheaper" I think price-drops are quicker to be seen in the offline-market than the online one. Because if a game sells bad and they have to use that precious space to show another game price-drops will happen quick. There is no such issue with DD'ing, is there? Some games (depending on certain things) already drop price after 1/2 a month, won't see that happen in an online store. Also if there is only one supplier (being the dev) bye bye the chance that you visit a store of 8 and then find that in that one store it is no longer $50 but $20...

 

All that hard work you did demonstrating that the online cost is the same as the retail cost would indicate otherwise.

 

As for not seeing a price drop in an online store, I disagree. Given that I, you know, actually keep track of them. I guarantee you that if sales are crap at $50 on a game, regardless of how it's distributed, it's price will go down. Consumers don't understand how much influence they have on the price of goods.

 

You love to hammer onto me with "get economical lessons if you wan't to know about the industry". WHY will you not accept a printed manual and disk IS actual added value. Does a disk press himself? Does a manual press himself? Nope. And since it took time, labor and material it counts as added value. Added value without the actual product becoming more expensive too. Actually making it cheaper. $50 - (nothing; since all on disk... actually even + if you wan't the same) VS $50 - $4 (for the making of booklet, disk and box/shipping). See what I prefer?

 

I have already commented that if someone values the authentic CD and the manual, then they should buy the retail copy. The reason why I go on about economics is because you seem utterly confused that a DD game would sell for the same price. You were bitching that Half-Life 2, a game that (if the steam preload means anything) had pretty good DD sales, still sold at the standard $50. If people are willing to pay $50 for something, and a company doesn't anticipate an increase in revenue by dropping the price, they probably won't do it.

 

But that is also the current way, is it not? Ofcourse those art-making guys do not earn even something NEAR what the big folks get, but they do exist...

 

No, it's not. The decision of game developers is heavily influenced by the publisher. It's part of the reason why the game developers themselves complain about stagnation in the industry. The publisher has less personal investment into the game, and seems intent on funding games like Enter the Matrix and Driv3r because they have established IPs and they are a shoo-in for making "big bux." They are seen as the primary catalyst (this is according to game devs too) behind the focus on graphics over gameplay. I wouldn't be surprised if they are the ones saying "Games should be shorter to appeal to the mass market" either.

 

So, tell, what prevents you from placing your HL2 disk with manual and box online on Ebay?

 

Because of the copyprotection scheme Valve implemented. You have to validate your CD key on a Steam account. I haven't tried, but as far as I can tell the only way you could successfully sell your CD is if you gave the other guy your Steam account as well. You cannot validate a CD key under a different account.

 

And you can DL it for free with a $20,- UT2K4...

 

Assuming of course that both the free download and the retail release are exactly the same. If they are, then the people that bought the $25 official version are being stupid. I certainly wouldn't blame any developer/publisher for that!

[Hassat Hunter]

@ Gromnir:

 

Sure; if DD worked like the Pro-DD'ers claim then I have nothing against it. If it really reduces the amount of copies devs need to sell with 90% with a 33% reduction to us people; sure; I will help them out.

But now I do not like the feeling of being ****ed by those devs. They nicely claim that in order to make profit they need to sell like between 75K and 100K of games with a cost of $50 (calculation to this number from McCarthy's interview can be seen before...). If that is so and they can reduce the amount needed with 90% with a 33% why don't they???

It is all nice and fun to claim how evil those producers are and claim how they are going to be the death of us and how DD profits both us and them... but it does NOT profit US. If they do claim that stuff, yet not deliver; I am certainly NOT willing to help. To bad for them...

I probably go way to far seeing as this is only the BS of one Dev... A TROIKA one to boot but the fact J.E. does back him up on his assessements make me fear that this might be a general thing among devs. Too bad only OE devs hang around here; I would love to know how other devs of small companies would look toward the statement of Mr. McCarthy and the points made in this thread...

 

And my main point is not that I want the box and manual. I want the most worth of my money. Currently that is with the retail version because it contains that stuff (= added value) for the same price...

 

A bicycle would take longer.  Net connections do cost money, and if you don't have a fixed cost for bandwidth like I do, then DD is probably not for you.  Same with people that still have to use dial-up modems.  As for taking a lot more time...I suppose.  Except that I can download the game at 3:30 AM if I want.  I buy most of my DD games while I sleep.  I don't see the large time investment required, when I can have the game download while I'm at school/work/sleeping.  In any case, it's not like I can't do other stuff on my computer while I download it either.  I was chatting it up on forums when I bought SR2.

 

Not really. Unless you think 15 min back and forth including browsing and buying is a "longer time". I do have a fixed cost, but the DL-speed is not that good for games. If I wanted to do that I have to get a faster connection, and how often I would really use it to buy my games online? The rest of the times it is just additional expense of something that I don't use... And I don't trust DL'ing when not around... I have had plenty of times something then happens that then corrupts the save (thus download again) or that you get to click something to proceed and that thus sits there along time before you actually start or continue on

 

I'd rather Feargus not have to rely on a "slam-dunk" to get Obsidian some money so that they have a bit more influence with publishers to start publishing their own IP.

 

Too late. OE already had one, and another one is coming up. Their own game is also coming up (PNJ)...

 

I have already commented that if someone values the authentic CD and the manual, then they should buy the retail copy.  The reason why I go on about economics is because you seem utterly confused that a DD game would sell for the same price.  You were bitching that Half-Life 2, a game that (if the steam preload means anything) had pretty good DD sales, still sold at the standard $50.  If people are willing to pay $50 for something, and a company doesn't anticipate an increase in revenue by dropping the price, they probably won't do it.

 

And thus they will never make DD big because it has absolute no profit (financially) whatsoever above getting it in the stores... and does it surprise us a million seller sells good anywhere where it comes? Hell, Oblivion probably got alot of online DL's even if it was retail price +10%

 

and seems intent on funding games like Enter the Matrix and Driv3r because they have established IPs and they are a shoo-in for making "big bux."

 

You can blame your favorite "power of da people" for this. If they mass bought a good game like MDK instead of all jumped on the crap titles mentioned guess what higher variety we would see? You say the masses influence prices and game-stock, but due to a large amount of people buying Fifa 57 and NFS 32 and The Sims7 and Doom 5 we are stuck to these type of games... IF there is DD why would the people suddenly change and buy different... more intelligent?

 

 

Because of the copyprotection scheme Valve implemented.  You have to validate your CD key on a Steam account.  I haven't tried, but as far as I can tell the only way you could successfully sell your CD is if you gave the other guy your Steam account as well.  You cannot validate a CD key under a different account.

 

So; give 'em the account... hell, don't even need to sell your box and disk and manual... keep 'em and sell your account on Ebay... can give you that cash too (hey, maybe you can even sell your digital too then )

 

Assuming of course that both the free download and the retail release are exactly the same.  If they are, then the people that bought the $25 official version are being stupid. I certainly wouldn't blame any developer/publisher for that!

 

Don't know, don't care...since I can DL RO for free I really not gonna pay for it... whatever extra stuff they pack into it.

And stupidity is inside people. Producers force upon us crap like Enter the Matrix because it sells... if we improve they improve...

Not a DD is going to fix that...

[Dhruin]

I just want to understand these two things.

 

So...Take2 and Rockstar are nice folks even though they have sold ~25M copies of the GTA franchise at pretty close to full price. Let's assume the average price was $40...that's something like $1 Billion at retail for developments that probably cost a total of under $60M - certainly under $100M. That's supply and demand, market price, all fine and dandy. They could have sold latter copies at $25 or whatever to benefit the consumer since they made such huge profits on the first couple but we don't expect them to (quite rightly).

 

On the other hand, say...Brad Wardell from Stardock is a dirty, pondscum, greedy bastard because his 100,000-sellling original GalCiv sold 10,000 copies via DD at the same price as the recommended retail of $39.

 

Right?

 

...McCarthy lied...

 

I know you dislike the numbers he presented but where did he lie?

 

----

 

As an aside, someone asked how much more Troika got from ToEE from the DD versions. The answer would be (almost certainly) zippo. ToEE isn't Troika's IP and the developer doesn't usually make any royalties until the development costs and a further profit margin are "repaid" to the publisher. There's little chance ToEE made the breakeven, so they would have seen nothing extra.

[alanschu]

Not really. Unless you think 15 min back and forth including browsing and buying is a "longer time". I do have a fixed cost, but the DL-speed is not that good for games. If I wanted to do that I have to get a faster connection, and how often I would really use it to buy my games online? The rest of the times it is just additional expense of something that I don't use... And I don't trust DL'ing when not around... I have had plenty of times something then happens that then corrupts the save (thus download again) or that you get to click something to proceed and that thus sits there along time before you actually start or continue on

 

Unless you have any idea how far away I am from a place that sells computer games, you can't possibly state how long it takes for me to bike to any place, so it's moot.

 

As for corrupted downloads, sounds like a personal problem. I've never had a "click something to proceed" that popped up in the middle of a download either. I used to download 100MB+ demos when I was on dialup overnight.

 

I think you're just trying to find additional reasons that only occur under extreme circumstances because you have already decided that DD is not for you (which I never had a problem with).

 

Too late. OE already had one, and another one is coming up. Their own game is also coming up (PNJ)...

 

Yes. I know. Which is why I'd rather he not have to survive on a slam dunk. I'd rather he did not have to put his team under extreme pressure to get IWD2 out the door simply because they desperately need money because their previous games (which I loved) were not huge sellers.

 

I'm well aware of the fact that they had to go for "slam-dunks" just to get the possibility of making their own IP (which many are already convinced is vapourware). It has little to do with what I said though.

 

And thus they will never make DD big because it has absolute no profit (financially) whatsoever above getting it in the stores... and does it surprise us a million seller sells good anywhere where it comes? Hell, Oblivion probably got alot of online DL's even if it was retail price +10%

 

What? Absolutely no profit? What? I think there's a language barrier here. And no, it doesn't surprise me that a good game sells well. As for the retail price +10% for the online purchase, I guess I'll just agree to disagree. Especially considering all the work you did to show that the prices were typically the same.

 

You can blame your favorite "power of da people" for this. If they mass bought a good game like MDK instead of all jumped on the crap titles mentioned guess what higher variety we would see? You say the masses influence prices and game-stock, but due to a large amount of people buying Fifa 57 and NFS 32 and The Sims7 and Doom 5 we are stuck to these type of games... IF there is DD why would the people suddenly change and buy different... more intelligent?

 

You're missing the point. Publisher X opted to support Crap Game Y over potentially new Idea Z because he knew Crap Game Y would make him more money, but wasn't sure if New Idea Z would. The problem here (and this is even in the words of developers, such as Will Wright which you brought up) is that New Idea Z never gets a chance. The whole point of DD, as you have even conceded, is that you don't need to sell as much to make a profit. The higher ROI means that historically marginal titles (like pretty much all the BIS PC games) become economically viable. New Idea Z has a greater potential for turning a profit, that it becomes less risky for creditors (whomever they may be) to help finance a project. It's about supporting innovation.

 

So; give 'em the account... hell, don't even need to sell your box and disk and manual... keep 'em and sell your account on Ebay... can give you that cash too (hey, maybe you can even sell your digital too then shocked.gif )

 

Which is why I said that selling a digital copy of it is no different than selling a retail copy.

 

Don't know, don't care...since I can DL RO for free I really not gonna pay for it... whatever extra stuff they pack into it.

 

No ****ing **** sherlock. I'm not saying that you should either. Just like I didn't buy Counterstrike (a game I played a ton) when the retail version came out because I already owned Half-Life, I'm not going to fault you for not buying a game you already have.

 

Besides, you were asking why someone would pay $25 for the retail version, when you can get UT2K4 for $20. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that the Retail Red Orchestra has additional content in some way shape or form. This argument though is totally non sequitor, and accomplishes nothing. I never said that someone should buy a $25 game if they can get that same game for $20.

[Dhruin]

... IF there is DD why would the people suddenly change and buy different... more intelligent?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If you understood the fundamental point, you wouldn't ask this. The masses won't suddenly buy these titles. But because there are higher margins with DD, you can sell less copies and still be viable. The current system requires mass sales, hence less diversity.

[Llyranor]

Don't know, don't care...since I can DL RO for free I really not gonna pay for it... whatever extra stuff they pack into it.

 

No ****ing **** sherlock. I'm not saying that you should either. Just like I didn't buy Counterstrike (a game I played a ton) when the retail version came out because I already owned Half-Life, I'm not going to fault you for not buying a game you already have.

 

Besides, you were asking why someone would pay $25 for the retail version, when you can get UT2K4 for $20. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that the Retail Red Orchestra has additional content in some way shape or form. This argument though is totally non sequitor, and accomplishes nothing. I never said that someone should buy a $25 game if they can get that same game for $20.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You shouldn't buy NWN2 if you already have NWN1, since it's the same game! That's why digital distribution sucks!

[alanschu]

Dammit! Stop showing me up!

[Spider]

As an aside, someone asked how much more Troika got from ToEE from the DD versions.  The answer would be (almost certainly) zippo.  ToEE isn't Troika's IP and the developer doesn't usually make any royalties until the development costs and a further profit margin are "repaid" to the publisher.  There's little chance ToEE made the breakeven, so they would have seen nothing extra.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That someone would have been me. I guess ToEE was a bad example since it sold so little, I used it because it was a game I knew was sold online at retail price and because it ties somewhat to the topic. Although what I was curious about could still be answered with that example, so let me rephrase the question.

 

I am aware that before Troika would see even a penny, their share of a game's profits would have to exceed the money the publisher had already fronted. Now, when a game is sold through retail, that typically means $3 per game, and a certain percentage gets eaten by distribution costs and the store getting it's due. Now, for those copies of ToEE sold online, that percentage was removed or at least lowered. So does that mean that Troika's share of each game sold (to be counted against the production costs) increased or did they still only get $3 per game?

 

Or in other words, would ToEE have needed to sell less copies before Troika saw any cash if it had sold more through DD?

 

What I'm getting at here is will DD truly benefit developers that much, since they will still be reliant on publishers for funding. A mainstream title will still cost $5-10 million to make and that money still needs to be invested before a single copy is sold.

[Hassat Hunter]

So...Take2 and Rockstar are nice folks even though they have sold ~25M copies of the GTA franchise at pretty close to full price.  Let's assume the average price was $40...that's something like $1 Billion at retail for developments that probably cost a total of under $60M - certainly under $100M.  That's supply and demand, market price, all fine and dandy.  They could have sold latter copies at $25 or whatever to benefit the consumer since they made such huge profits on the first couple but we don't expect them to (quite rightly).

 

Yes. Because they also got $3 per copy then just like the other devs that sell in retail. But if they catch $40 of each I would expect a reduction, yes...

Besides that if their own stake is SO small in the price they COULDN'T even drop the price even if they wanted to

 

...McCarthy lied...

 

I know you dislike the numbers he presented but where did he lie?

 

Couldn't you just posted all and then bolded this part. I have no idea of which post you got this and where exactly in that post and not going to search for it now. So I cannot tell you exactly what I meant to say it in that context (which is not shown now)

 

As an aside, someone asked how much more Troika got from ToEE from the DD versions.  The answer would be (almost certainly) zippo.  ToEE isn't Troika's IP and the developer doesn't usually make any royalties until the development costs and a further profit margin are "repaid" to the publisher.  There's little chance ToEE made the breakeven, so they would have seen nothing extra.

 

Whee. But DD was supposed to go around that no?

DD gives all cash to devs since they avoid publishers. They do not make any cash though since it goes to publishers!

SURE!

 

Unless you have any idea how far away I am from a place that sells computer games, you can't possibly state how long it takes for me to bike to any place, so it's moot.

 

That was my own buy games time. I have no idea how far away it is for you, but since you live in the states and that has everything nearby I would not expect it would be as far as you mentioned though...

 

I think you're just trying to find additional reasons that only occur under extreme circumstances because you have already decided that DD is not for you (which I never had a problem with).

 

Yeah. As long as it is the same price as in Retail DD is not for me indeed...

 

What?  Absolutely no profit?  What?  I think there's a language barrier here.  And no, it doesn't surprise me that a good game sells well.  As for the retail price +10% for the online purchase, I guess I'll just agree to disagree.  Especially considering all the work you did to show that the prices were typically the same.

 

Yup. Absolutely no profit for us costumers. And I didn't say DD prices are +10%, just pointing out for many popular games they could easily up the price and there would still be silly people who pay it...

Guess there really is a language barrier if you TOTALLY misread the entire text there...

 

You're missing the point.  Publisher X opted to support Crap Game Y over potentially new Idea Z because he knew Crap Game Y would make him more money, but wasn't sure if New Idea Z would.  The problem here (and this is even in the words of developers, such as Will Wright which you brought up) is that New Idea Z never gets a chance.  The whole point of DD, as you have even conceded, is that you don't need to sell as much to make a profit.  The higher ROI means that historically marginal titles (like pretty much all the BIS PC games) become economically viable.  New Idea Z has a greater potential for turning a profit, that it becomes less risky for creditors (whomever they may be) to help finance a project.  It's about supporting innovation.

 

Let's take a Dev. Let's call them SHINY. They produce several original games. Problem is barely anybody bought them. Then SHINY makes crap game "Enter the Matrix". Despite being unoriginal and crap it sold and gave loads of $. After that SHINY only continued to make crap games because those made the cash. You can make all the original games you wan't; but if nobody buys it it doesn't work. And how many other devs on DD would you think follow SHINY's example after tasting the pure cash that can be made by the crap people want? And how many original games will you see coming past then?

 

Which is why I said that selling a digital copy of it is no different than selling a retail copy.

Indeed. But if I get additional goodiees with that retail copy I sure as hell get that one...

 

 

If you understood the fundamental point, you wouldn't ask this.  The masses won't suddenly buy these titles.  But because there are higher margins with DD, you can sell less copies and still be viable.  The current system requires mass sales, hence less diversity.

 

Yes. That can. But will they? And if they can be financially dependable with 90% less sales with a 33% price reduction WHY don't all devs grab for this chicken with the golden eggs? Are the eggs maybe not as gold as they look, but mere (enter the name of that fake-gold here) and there-fore the devs hold back???

 

Personnally IF DD becames big business I probably find a few friends who want the same game, then spread the cost between the amount of people who wan't the game. We then buy it and DL it all for ourselves with that same "copy". If the devs don't give me the price-redux I will just take it... and when they make it as easy as people make it sound I think I will gonna enjoy it alot more than retail time! Let the progress begin!!!

[Spider]

As an aside, someone asked how much more Troika got from ToEE from the DD versions.  The answer would be (almost certainly) zippo.  ToEE isn't Troika's IP and the developer doesn't usually make any royalties until the development costs and a further profit margin are "repaid" to the publisher.  There's little chance ToEE made the breakeven, so they would have seen nothing extra.

 

Whee. But DD was supposed to go around that no?

DD gives all cash to devs since they avoid publishers. They do not make any cash though since it goes to publishers!

SURE!

 

Actually, ToEE was my example and a way to figure out how beneficial DD would be for a developer that is still dependant on a publisher. The argument that DD benefits developers greatly have, so far, been focused on developers circumventing publishers altogether. I was just trying to get another perspective into it.

 

That was my own buy games time. I have no idea how far away it is for you, but since you live in the states and that has everything nearby I would not expect it would be as far as you mentioned though...

 

Actually, in a lot of places in the US, distances can be fairly large. Cities spread out much further from the city core than they do in Europe, at least where I've been. In many places a car is almost mandatory if you're going anywhere (but it being such a large country, this isn't an absolute truth).

[Nartwak]

To give that some perspective I live about fourty miles from the nearest town of any size, and about seventy miles from the nearest hospital.

 

Hmm, moving exclusively to direct download would kill the used games market.

[metadigital]

Is it legal to buy (for example) Half-Life 2 via direct download, play it until you are done with it, uninstall it from your own computer, burn it to a CD and then re-sell it on Ebay?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No. Strictly speaking it is illegal to re-sell your software licence, as it contravenes the EULA. (Interesting constitutional Supreme Court battle-in-waiting, there.)

When the company that supplied you with your direct download goes down, you'll lose your investment (unless you've burned it somehow), and the product becomes difficult to acquire. If your CD breaks for a game that's from a company that's gone under, you might still be able to find someone else's copies off of Ebay.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If your DD fails you might stil be able to buy a mint condition copy off eBay, too.

 

 

The biggest point, and also the most ignored in this thread, is that the Developers retain control of their IP, rather than the publishers.

 

Personnally IF DD becames big business I probably find a few friends who want the same game, then spread the cost between the amount of people who wan't the game. We then buy it and DL it all for ourselves with that same "copy". If the devs don't give me the price-redux I will just take it... and when they make it as easy as people make it sound I think I will gonna enjoy it alot more than retail time! Let the progress begin!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is no different from pooling together with your friends and buying a single copy of a game, retail. Same problems: you can only install it on one PC at once.

 

And I'm sure you aren't advocating piracy on the Obsidian fora.

[metadigital]

Hmm, moving exclusively to direct download would kill the used games market.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not necessarily; it would break the current EULA model, which I don't particularly like or agree with. It would require a modification, say, have the developers (who now own their IP and therefore its copyright) allocate the individual end-user identification according to however they want, e.g. act as a broker between seller and purchaser ...

[Hassat Hunter]

That is no different from pooling together with your friends and buying a single copy of a game, retail. Same problems: you can only install it on one PC at once.

 

And I'm sure you aren't advocating piracy on the Obsidian fora.

 

Well, with the disks you need to look for a crack atleast...possibly infected with virus and spyware....maybe even a large effort to find one on day of release...

 

With DD you don't have to. Instead of risking your PC's safety the devs themselves make it work for you... instead of having to wait a few days/weeks before a programmer made a program you can legally do it... DEV SUPPORTED!

 

And since when is legally downlaoding a DD copy "Piracy"...

[Dhruin]

If the devs don't give me the price-redux I will just take it... and when they make it as easy as people make it sound I think I will gonna enjoy it alot more than retail time! Let the progress begin!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

End of conversation for me. 'Bye.

[Nartwak]

Hmm, moving exclusively to direct download would kill the used games market.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not necessarily; it would break the current EULA model, which I don't particularly like or agree with. It would require a modification, say, have the developers (who now own their IP and therefore its copyright) allocate the individual end-user identification according to however they want, e.g. act as a broker between seller and purchaser ...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're right, but that sounds like a pain; doing the work of the publisher, the retailer and the developer. Maybe I'm not following your concepts close enough?

[Hassat Hunter]

How nice. People get off the convo when an easy to abuse flaw is exposed in their favorite stuff (being Direct Download)...

 

I doubt I will be the only one who thinks of it... and then how does that help Devs, eh?

 

Will they start putting fingerprint (still just visit) or irisscaners (same, visit once) for the games. Ah, the visiting once can be get around if you have to scan every single startup...

Hmmm...

[Spider]

They left because you said you'd pirate the game if they didn't do what you saw fit. Pirating a physical copy is just as easy (and actually probably easier) than pirating a DD copy, so you've exposed no flaw what so ever.

 

As it stands today, if someone wants to pirate a game, they can, regardless of how the game is distributed.

 

The biggest point, and also the most ignored in this thread, is that the Developers retain control of their IP, rather than the publishers.

 

Again assuming that developers somehoe get the ability to self finance their games. As I've stated in the past, I am all for DD but I'm not sure it will free developers from the publishers. Someone still needs to put up the cash up front.

[Hassat Hunter]

They left because you said you'd pirate the game if they didn't do what you saw fit. Pirating a physical copy is just as easy (and actually probably easier) than pirating a DD copy, so you've exposed no flaw what so ever.

 

As it stands today, if someone wants to pirate a game, they can, regardless of how the game is distributed.

 

They really need a smiley here with a banner saying... "WARNING! SARCASM CAN BE FOUND IN THIS POST"... <_<

Anyway, how much easier can cracking be than if you (legally) DL a copy, install it and then run it, and repeat that process (All legally) with friends than finding a crack online (never did; so no idea how hard it is, but I doubt you will find one on release day; and as said there is a risk for spyware/virusses)?

 

Again assuming that developers somehoe get the ability to self finance their games. As I've stated in the past, I am all for DD but I'm not sure it will free developers from the publishers. Someone still needs to put up the cash up front.

 

I have seen plenty of devs keep the IP themselves anyways. This especially happens with what the public loves to call the greedy publishers; like Microsoft!

[Spider]

Anyway, how much easier can cracking be than if you (legally) DL a copy, install it and then run it, and repeat that process (All legally) with friends than finding a crack online (never did; so no idea how hard it is, but I doubt you will find one on release day; and as said there is a risk for spyware/virusses)?

 

Actually, a lot harder. DD is probably protected by some sort of activation key which would only be usable for one installation at a time. Maybe the game can be installed on several computers, but only one of them can actually play the game at any given time. It all depends on the implementation I guess.

 

Cracks for physical copies can usually be found fairly quickly. If not the day of release, then only a few days after. I've used several since I don't like being forced to switch cds when I'm switching games and since I always have several installed, that happens a lot. I've also never gotten a virus or a trojan through a game crack.

 

Anyway, the point here is that pirating a game is childsplay. Anyone can do it, regardless of how a game is distributed. The reason people don't pirate isn't because they don't have the ability, but because they think it's wrong and they want to support the people who make games they like.

[metadigital]

That is no different from pooling together with your friends and buying a single copy of a game, retail. Same problems: you can only install it on one PC at once.

 

And I'm sure you aren't advocating piracy on the Obsidian fora.

And since when is legally downlaoding a DD copy "Piracy"...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not the direct download, this comment:

If the devs don't give me the price-redux I will just take it... and when they make it as easy as people make it sound I think I will gonna enjoy it alot more than retail time! Let the progress begin!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I am unsure what you mean, so I assume you are not advocating something illegal.