Not Related to AP per say; Why does everyone hate DRM?

[ltolman]

I cant speak for the entire world but I'll just speak for myself.

 

I work hard for my money, or rather credit cards LOL. I've been working straight for nearly 16 years now. I work full time around 36hrs a week and probably only earning 12 dollars an hour.

 

When a PC game comes out, I spend the 60 dollars, I install it. If its a good game, I'll probably just keep it on the hard drive and not worry about uninstalling it. I have a Desktop PC and a Laptop but I refuse to play a game on my laptop; besides I spent 2500 dollars on this desktop and only 700 for my laptop. If its a game that I dont really care for; Rogue Warrior; I'll beat it and un install it but I"ll make sure its pretty much gone from my computer.

 

Yes I understand DRM is attached to your computer, meaning one would have to go thru the hard drive with a fine toothpick to get rid of it. Uninstalling the game via Add/Remove programs and also going into the registry I hear doesnt completely remove the DRM file for that specific game.

 

But ok in the case like Alpha Protocol, it said what??? 5 installs? You buy it, you install it......what is the percentage rate of people that un install the game after they beat it? Maybe I'm different because I have a bigger hard drive that isnt concerned about free space??????

 

So what, you shelf the game for 6 months and re install it which would make #2 so I guess in the case of APs DRM that means that if people play the game and un install it right away their 60 dollar game lasts them 2yrs whereas other games that dont have DRM (ie Diablo 2) can last them 10 years and have 400 installations???

 

Is that why people hate DRM? Because DRM usually constraints the number of installs? What about if a person was to reformat the hard drive? I'll admit that I dont reformat my Hard Drive like some magazines say one should.........every 6 months or every year but if people do reformat the hard drive; that would get rid of the DRM file in which it opens it back up right?

 

So wouldnt that seem like a fair choice; buy the game for 60 dollars; play it, un install it, shelf it for 6 months re install it. 2yrs go by you're install limit has been reached, reformat the hard drive from scratch re install the OS and now your PC game has 5 installations left right?

 

At any rate, I guess I just dont see what the big deal is?

 

Ubisoft games now require and active internet connection at all times to play, doesnt that apply to Steam games as well? I'm already using DSL so that doesnt bother me too much; but what does bother me is that when I do want to play and their servers are having hiccups thats whats irrating LOL

 

Anyways just my 2cp

 

PS. Its almost every game I'm interested in buying. I hear people complain that they wont buy the game cause of DRM. Again its not specfic to AP.

Edited May 10, 2010 by ltolman

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Why shouldn't we dislike DRM? It does little, if anything, prevent piracy and hurts the legitimate, paying customers. I understand the need and desire for companies to protect their work but some of the DRM schemes are, in my opinion, over the line. Ironically, the DRM you stated, Alpha Protocol's, is not one of those and I intend to get the game on day-one (in fact I've had it per-ordered for awhile now).

Edited May 10, 2010 by Deadly_Nightshade

[Pidesco]

Moved to the appropriate forum.

[Oner]

There was a huge misinformation campaign by pirates and the effects are still lasting.

[Walsingham]

I applaud the spirit of your objection. However, I disagree.

 

For me the argument is as follows

 

1. DRM does not stop piracy. Therefore the cost half of the cost/benefit equation had better be bloody good.

 

2. DRM is intrusive and monkeys about with the foundations of my PC. I find that disrespectful, but it's a minor point.

 

3. Most DRM requires me to be online, which mean if for some reason I can't pay for internet I won't be able to play my favourite games.

 

4. DRM can and does add instability to the game.

 

5. In the case of Steam these costs are offset by a positive cost of community support and general slickness.

 

##

 

In short: no benefit, plenty of costs. in fact I'd go so far as to suggest it may encourage piracy, because only people who pirate don't have to put up with DRM!

[Gfted1]

At any rate, I guess I just dont see what the big deal is?

 

Ubisoft games now require and active internet connection at all times to play, doesnt that apply to Steam games as well? I'm already using DSL so that doesnt bother me too much; but what does bother me is that when I do want to play and their servers are having hiccups thats whats irrating LOL

 

I think most people feel they are getting screwed over because DRM does almost nothing to prevent piracy yet inconveniences legitimate users. Using your examples above, just imagine if you still had dial-up. Or if the company servers go down and you cant play your game for a few days. Or if 5 years from now they take the server offline and you cant play at all.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

There was a huge misinformation campaign by pirates and the effects are still lasting.

 

Yes, because, of course, everyone who dislikes DRM must be a pirate or have been brainwashed by one.

 

[Oner]

There was a huge misinformation campaign by pirates and the effects are still lasting.

Yes, because, of course, everyone who dislikes DRM must be a pirate or have been brainwashed by one.

 

You're confusing me with Hurlshot I think.

[Calax]

At any rate, I guess I just dont see what the big deal is?

 

Ubisoft games now require and active internet connection at all times to play, doesnt that apply to Steam games as well? I'm already using DSL so that doesnt bother me too much; but what does bother me is that when I do want to play and their servers are having hiccups thats whats irrating LOL

 

I think most people feel they are getting screwed over because DRM does almost nothing to prevent piracy yet inconveniences legitimate users. Using your examples above, just imagine if you still had dial-up. Or if the company servers go down and you cant play your game for a few days. Or if 5 years from now they take the server offline and you cant play at all.

Well, Steam, from how things have been, probably won't be shut down for a long long time. That said, the thing about constant internet connection is already brought up by wals. But one thing that does need pointing out is that Steam has the offline mode that you can play with. You do need to get online to start the install etc, but once you verify that it's authentic, then the game itself is available offline.

 

Steam, thus far, seems like one of the best DRM schemes out there, because not only does it act as DRM, but it also provides the social network that Wals mentioned. Some people just don't like heavy DRM schemes like Ye Olde Starforce or the current Ubisoft BS, mainly because they would kill your ability to play the game for no fault of your own.

 

Such DRM schemes tend to make people more and more reactionary and hardline about "NO DRM EVAR!" But the thing is, DRM does work on the more casual market. Not everyone who is interested in a game knows how to pirate it. Many do, but not all, and thus they still get some benefit, but not as much as they dream of getting.

[Nemo0071]

1. DRM does not stop piracy. Therefore the cost half of the cost/benefit equation had better be bloody good.

2. DRM is intrusive and monkeys about with the foundations of my PC. I find that disrespectful, but it's a minor point.

3. Most DRM requires me to be online, which mean if for some reason I can't pay for internet I won't be able to play my favourite games.

4. DRM can and does add instability to the game.

5. In the case of Steam these costs are offset by a positive cost of community support and general slickness.

 

##

 

In short: no benefit, plenty of costs. in fact I'd go so far as to suggest it may encourage piracy, because only people who pirate don't have to put up with DRM!

Agreed on all of them. Also I don't consider #2 to be a minor point. It's downright disrespectful to customers who are actually paying for the game.

 

And just to give credit where it's due, I don't think Steam needs you to be connected to the internet (save for the first time; during the installation). I know I played Portal with Steam running in offline mode. Even Team Fortress 2 in the developer commentary mode. I just (obviously) didn't have access to the online content.

 

Steam has the offline mode that you can play with. You do need to get online to start the install etc, but once you verify that it's authentic, then the game itself is available offline.

Confirmed then.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Steam, thus far, seems like one of the best DRM schemes out there...

 

I'd disagree that it's one of the best DRM schemes although no-one can disagree that it is one of the most popular.

[Tigranes]

I think this is really interesting guys, because this sort of shows how people have different levels / types of understanding with DRM and shows how some other people might approach it. Anyway, to answer ltolman's queries directly;

 

-> People use computers in a huge variety of wildly different ways, that you really don't even think about until you see it for yourself. I've seen people do things with computers I didn't even know were possible, or people who have made such a massive mess of their computers and think that's how it's meant to be. There are people who reformat every 6 months, people who have 3 or 4 computers, people who are on the move, people who rent a computer, people who love going back to play 10 year old games. I'm actually firing up Diablo 2 again, and Blizzard lets you re-download the game if you still have the cdkey, and they removed all forms of DRM with their late patch. You only have to go through headaches with 1 or 2 games to understand people who wish that their game was just theirs without all sorts of crazy crap on it.

 

-> In the case of Alpha Protocol, what you say is right. In many other cases, if you reformat your hard drive, you still don't get your activations back. Sometimes you get screwed and lose activations permanently because you didnt keep track of them. Then you have to... call customer support? Maybe?

 

Ubisoft games now require and active internet connection at all times to play, doesnt that apply to Steam games as well? I'm already using DSL so that doesnt bother me too much; but what does bother me is that when I do want to play and their servers are having hiccups thats whats irrating LOL

 

-> Steam has an offline mode, but even if it applied to Steam, that wouldn't make it any better. You don't have to go to the third world to find slow internet or intermittent connections, I live in New Zealand. And as you say, servers have hiccups - a totally unnecessary bother. I wouldn't buy an Ubisoft game because then I couldn't, say, play on the move with my laptop, play if my internet kicks out (a fairly regular occurrence), and because there's no good reason for me to have to be online.

[Calax]

I wasn't necessarily speaking to that it was the best in the CUSTOMERS eyes. But overall, between customers and publishers, it seems like the best balance between profitability, bonuses to the customer, and the fact that if somebody is FOUND to be pirating a particular item, then they get banned and loose all the games they'd had, thus giving a fairly significant consequence for people who do break the law.

 

I mean steams model is so successful Blizzard is incorporating a lot of it's stuff (digital downloads, the ability to see people in other games etc) into the new Bnet that they're launching around the time of SCII.

[Nemo0071]

Steam, thus far, seems like one of the best DRM schemes out there...

 

I'd disagree that it's one of the best DRM schemes although no-one can disagree that it is one of the most popular.

I think the popularity mostly comes from the cost/benefit ratio Wals mentioned.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

...and the fact that if somebody is FOUND to be pirating a particular item, then they get banned and loose all the games they'd had..

 

Only if they're using a cracked Steam client - if it's a standard .exe crack then it's very hard for Valve/Steam to detect that without being extremely intrusive (more intrusive than most people would want).

 

I think the popularity mostly comes from the cost/benefit ratio Wals mentioned.

 

Although some people, including myself, would argue that Steam has more costs than benefits unless it's being compared to another, worse form of DRM or a much more expensive product.

[Mamoulian War]

maybe i spent last few weeks in some information forsaken place, but can anyone tell me what is the AP PC DRM? I know it's Steam, but is there something more like limited activations or required inet connection?

 

thanks

[Deadly_Nightshade]

I know it's Steam, but is there something more like limited activations or required inet connection?

 

It's not Steam unless you buy the Steam version and even then it uses SEGA's Uniloc DRM. That will give you five activations with unlimited installations. If you need more the game will prompt you to de-authorize a previous activation, and you can get an activation back even if your PC was completely destroyed. Now that's fairly reasonable already but another major plus is that the DRM will be patched out game within 18-24 months after the game ships. Here's a link with more information.

[Azzy]

My personal thing is an opposition to online connections I don't trust companies to not allow feature creep amongst other negative possibilities. In the case of Alpha Protocol I'll be waiting till the removal patch is released before buying the game. Hopefully they'll do the same as Deep Silver/Egosoft did with X3 and do a reissue of the DRM free game. (A bonus of getting a game after its been out for a year is all the fixes that happen in that time period and in the case of the X games thats a lot of bugs)

[Hurlshort]

There was a huge misinformation campaign by pirates and the effects are still lasting.

Yes, because, of course, everyone who dislikes DRM must be a pirate or have been brainwashed by one.

 

You're confusing me with Hurlshot I think.

 

 

I do think the AP DRM is pretty relaxed and isn't worth getting upset about. Do you even need the CD in the drive to play?

 

I'm also in the anti-Ubisoft camp, as internet connections for single player are lame-o.

[Oner]

I do think the AP DRM is pretty relaxed and isn't worth getting upset about. Do you even need the CD in the drive to play?

IIRC the Uniloc FAQ specifically says no.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Do you even need the CD in the drive to play?

 

Nope.

[Raithe]

As so many people do say, DRM can really depend on the type of DRM a game uses, and what sort of DRM people are used to...

 

I mean, back in the day (oh for my youth...) the only DRM was either a serial key you typed in during install, or having to keep the cd in the drive (or even both..) .

Then again, back in my reaaally youth, you had games that would prompt you now and then (sometimes in part of an in-game mini-game) to actually look through the manual for a specific page and type in that word, or select an icon or some sort of jibber-jabber like that...

 

The internet opened up a wonderful wide world of DRM's that can be really annoying.

Personally I'd steered clear of most games that required me to put in some third companies software, and create an account just to log in and play a single-player game that I'd bought.. and then I picked up GTAIV... oy vey.. that was an experience. Then I found I had to install Rockstar's Social Club doohickey.. put on Games for Windows stuff.. there I was thinking I could spend a happy few hours on christmas afternoon playing the shiny new game.... And instead I had to spend a few hours getting those "extras" installed (the joys of something glitching with something on my pc) and then having a dodgy internet connection that kept fluxing out as I tried to register so I could just login... That kind of set a sour tone. Then every time I hit play I had to go through ten minutes of running the social club, running games for windows, then getting into the game.....

It's DRM Jim, but not as we like it....

 

Now we have the Ubisoft DRM as the complete boogeyman at the moment... It requires you to have a constant internet connection - for a game thats 1> single-player and 2> has no frikkin need of the internet apart from their DRM designs. That being, Ubisoft keep your save games... on their central servers rather then letting you keep them on your computer. The game you buy, and they don't let you keep your own saves.... So if you want to put your fresh new single-player game on the laptop while you travel... you can't use it. (okay, if you find a wifi hotspot, or want to pay to modem connect via your cellphone or the like..) but even then, if your internet connection goes dodgy you get dumped out of the game...

Now that's why there's a whole heap of hate for Ubisoft DRM.

Not everyone can guarantee a clean, smooth running internet connection. So why would you want to buy a game that doesn't even let you play it when you want it?

 

On the current side of the equation, we have Alpha Protocol's declared DRM.. Unilock. 5 activations. That you can put on any computers you want to. You just need the internet connection to activate them, then no more worry. If you put it on a 6th, there's a nice option that offers to remove one of your previous activations.. Even if your computer wipes itself out before you can de-activate it, you can go to the Uniloc website and do it from them to open it up... and there's the mention that in a specific time frame, a patch will be out that will remove the DRM from the game.... All in all, that seems like a fairly fresh, simple, and (drumroll please) non-invasive way of handling it...

[Zoraptor]

Steam, thus far, seems like one of the best DRM schemes out there...

 

I'd disagree that it's one of the best DRM schemes although no-one can disagree that it is one of the most popular.

I think the popularity mostly comes from the cost/benefit ratio Wals mentioned.

The ultimate cause is that if you want to play Valve's games you have to have Steam- for HL2 alone that's an 8 million user base right away, and with Steamworksed games that number will only increase. I'd bet that the vast majority of people who use Steam, much like the vast majority of people who use SecuROM or any other DRM, are pretty much completely ignorant or utterly indifferent to it right up until the point it stuffs something up.

[Magister Lajciak]

People dislike DRM for different reasons and they are willing to put up with different forms of DRM depending on what's important to them.

 

I dislike all internet-based DRM, because it transitions games from being a product to being a service that can be taken away by the company shutting down its servers. As a result, any game that requires the internet for play/installation/activation/... is automatically placed on my no-buy list. By contrast, DRM based on disc-checks, serial keys, words from the manual, degradation of gameplay for pirated copies and so on is fine by me and I may even tolerate if it blacklists some potentially pirate-used software and installs itself into ring 0, though here I am more ambivalent. Once it needs the internet and thus creates artificial ongoing dependency on the company's servers, however, that is where I draw the line.

[Gorth]

DRM is just a way for companies to express how much they hate their customers. Some are in favour of brutal, corporeal spanking of their customers while others just tell their customers how much they suck for buying their products. It is not limited to the gaming industry, as the movie industry is very bad in this regard too.