Piracy

[pmp10]

Thank you Calax, exactly..

 

People will put up with annoying **** if they don't have any other option.

 

Wait.. so developers shouldn't combat piracy with offering better service for paying customers.. everyone should instead just accept annoying crap?.

They could also make a statement by not buying and not pirating it.

The problem with pirating something is that developer/publisher never knows if there was something wrong with the game or you just wanted it for free.

[Rosbjerg]

I agree that no one should pirate games - I'm in no way advocating that if anyone should be in doubt.

 

My whole argument is that a lot of consumers (myself included) find the mast majority of DRMs to be not only ineffective but also a nuisance to us instead of the intended pirates. This is my only beef, I feel like I'm being punished because some idiot decided s/he doesn't want to pay and that's not good business in my book. While it's a fair argument to simply boycott, and I've done that more than a few times, I feel my efforts just leads to publishers blaming pirates for the poor sales instead. And so we're back to square one with more DRM being introduced.

[Volourn]

"If piracy is always going to be an issue then you need to figure out how to get people to buy the product rather than prevent pirates "

 

How about both? You punish thives the way theives are supposed to be punished when caught. AND, you market your product to hionest folks. I don't believe in poo pooing crimes just ebcause you cna't completely stop it. Perhaps we should stop trying to put and end to rape, murder, and asaults since we'll never be able to completely stop the scumbags who commit these crimes, right? What a ridiculous notion.

[Rosbjerg]

reductio ad absurdum.. I too can play that game.. If the only alternative the police adopted was to arrest random people and harass innocent people then I do think we should stop trying..

[greylord]

More tehft defense! Scummy theif defenders are hilarious.

 

If you don't provide me with your car to rive to work I'm going to steal it for my convience. Your logic is stupid. And,d efense of theft is scummy evil.

 

Scumbags gonna defend scumbags, I guess.

 

My hypothesis is that half the pirates promote DRM. Afterall, as DRM makes it harder to be a legit customer and puts up more roadblocks they drive more and more customers to piracy (or to desert PC gaming and go console, which I've partially done, as I buy many things I would have used to buy on PC for the PS3 instead).

 

DRM is the piracy companies best friend!

 

So, no, scumbags will actually probably promote DRM half the time...wait a second...Volo...

 

Oh, we already figured you were probably a pirate though...so...no surprise there.

[Volourn]

But the companies aren't going around arresting random people. They have DRM in order to stop theives not to punish the buyer. Whether its effective or not is irrelevant. If you don't like their use of certain kinds of DRM don't buy from them. But, that doesn't give an excuse to steal the product or make stealking alright. Trying to blame the victim is silly. Companies have changed their DRM when there's been complaints so it's not like they are ignoring them. But, to beleive they should stop all attempts to stop the theft of their product or there is some divine right that makes theivery okay is just immoral.

[greylord]

To those who see the pirates as competitors rather than thieves, if I create a product and offer copies for $50 dollars and a pirate gives away that same product for nothing (not a similar rival product, but a stolen copy of my work), how do I compete with that? How do I compete with free? What the hell is wrong with people that they think I should have to?

 

If Ubisoft offered all of their PC games without DRM, piracy would still be an issue, it's just people would instead use the usual excuses like they weren't going to buy it anyway or after testing it for 20 hours they decided it sucked.

 

Actually, Ubisoft sold MORE PC GAMES overall for ALL PC games they sold when they didn't have draconic DRM from what I can tell...

 

On the otherhand their console sales are way high these days in relation to anything they used to put out...

[greylord]

you need to figure out how to get people to buy the product rather than prevent pirates

No, because the pathetic losers with entitlement issues as Gorth calls them will exist as long as there is a free version of the game available. The only way to stop them is to remove the free (pirate) version from the equation. People still pirate games offered by GoG and STEAM afterall.

 

You need to find a form of security that works, not give up on it altogether.

 

You are not gonna combat piracy by alienating yourself from the people providing your income.

Using DRM doesn't equal alienating your customers. Go back a few posts and you'll folks in this thread saying good things about Steam.

 

yes, but shooting your own customers normally isn't the way to do it.

 

For the bank analogy...if you have a bank and you notice that people are mugging the trucks that carry cash to and from your bank...what do you do.

 

With DRM they made it so that they shoot all unknown individuals approaching the truck no matter who they are...including bank customers.

 

Sure, you might kill a few of the pirates from robbing the bank...but you kill a WHOLE LOT of customers in the process. Furthermore, who do you think the customers blame...the pirates...the pirates aren't killing them...no...they'll be like me. The BANK is the one that's shooting the customers. And it's doing MORE to harm the customers and it's business then the pirates.

 

Furthermore, the BIG pirates aren't even those that were robbing the trucks by approaching the trucks, but instead the truck company itself. Shooting the people has NO effect on them because it's an INTERNAL problem. The bank decided to contract the truck company from China...and that company itself is taking the money hence making the bank shoot a LOT of customers, peeving them off, and killing off their customer base at the same time whilst doing nothing to actually stop the people actually stealing their money.

[greylord]

Notice that in 2009, e-books made up 1% of book sales. They now make up 40%.

 

The interesting thing is that book *publishers* aren't in charge of modern e-book DRM, book *distributors* are, and publishers are oblivious to the problems this is creating and will create.

 

As someone who reads books on Kindle, something to note. Unlike Ubi DRM...I don't have to be connected to the internet to actually read the book. If they made it so that was a requirement...I'd never buy their system or books.

[Rosbjerg]

Whether its effective or not is irrelevant. If you don't like their use of certain kinds of DRM don't buy from them.

 

Look Volo, you are basically saying that even if something doesn't work we should just keep doing it because something has to be done!

 

Trying to blame the victim is silly. Companies have changed their DRM when there's been complaints so it's not like they are ignoring them. But, to believe they should stop all attempts to stop the theft of their product or there is some divine right that makes theivery okay is just immoral.

 

Arguing that thievery is morraly just is wrong .. I agree with that, but that was never the issue to begin with so I don't know why you are bringing it up?

 

I'm simply saying that the current model of fighting piracy isn't working, in fact it seems to have quite the opposite effect - customers are starting to boycott and be annoyed - that's really effin serious, when your bread and butter starts complaining then you listen! And as you say they have reacted, but that reaction just isn't enough... You say pirates have entitlement issues and I agree - but companies do too - you have to treat your customer with respect otherwise you destroy the foundation of your income. But perhaps this is for the best - the music industry has certainly flourished as the old paradigm (ie publishers) is starting to die - perhaps the gaming industry will as well.

[Zoraptor]

To those who see the pirates as competitors rather than thieves, if I create a product and offer copies for $50 dollars and a pirate gives away that same product for nothing (not a similar rival product, but a stolen copy of my work), how do I compete with that? How do I compete with free? What the hell is wrong with people that they think I should have to?

Pirates are not competition. It's simply a question of not offering for sale a product that is worse than a pirate copy/ punishing legitimate customers relative to pirates. If you want to take a TWitcher2 approach and offer a bunch of extra stuff that's even better, but not really necessary.

 

More extended: they have to live in the world that exists, not the one they'd like to- fortunate really, as I'm sure most publishers would love to have persistent monitoring systems coupled to automatic monthly/ instant debits and 'Trusted Computing' style big brotherism; and for just about everything. What determines whether you are a profitable company is how many copies you sell, not how many copies are pirated, so if you take measures that cut into the number of people willing to buy you are hurting yourself. If pirates offer a free, less restricted and more convenient/stable experience you should at least try to tackle the two elements you can control rather than waving your arms and wishing real hard for a world in which piracy does not exist while coming up with ever more elaborate Rube-Goldstein schemes which just further worsen the other two factors.

 

I'm confused here, you didn't buy AC:B and AC:R because you didn't think AC2 was good enough, but what does this have to do with DRM?

Ironically, one of the later ACs had just a disc check on retail. One of the more pernicious effects of DRM schemes is that all your products get tainted with it even if they aren't actually using it.

 

Actually, Ubisoft sold MORE PC GAMES overall for ALL PC games they sold when they didn't have draconic DRM from what I can tell...

Oh, that's definite, can be seen from their annual/ quarterly reports. Their revenue from PC more than halved.

[Hurlshort]

I think we can all agree that Ubisoft screwed the pooch with their DRM.

[Hassat Hunter]

Sadly... Blizzard seems to use it too. Not that I care for them, but with StarCraft II and Diablo III, they aren't doing so bad.

(Anyone knows Torchlight foces Steam? Want to gift it for Christmas, but don't want to burden the receiver with Steam)

 

As for getting worse service.. it's like trying to get patches and DLC for Mass Effect 1. It seriously took me HALF AN HOUR to find damn 1.02 and 1.03. And another quarter of an hour to find the pass for Bring down the Sky, since it was almost impossible to find the old Bio account and it didn't pass over to the newer EA/Bio-Account. So much fun. And I probably have to do it again... NOT costumer-friendly.

 

Avoiding DRM would be a lot easier if it's prominently shown on the box or order site. Sadly I have already purchased about 3 games which used Stea without pre-knowledge of me. Anno 1404 used Ubi-terror without me knowing (fortunately I bought it after it got patched out) from the start etc. etc.

[Zoraptor]

There's non-steam versions of Torchlight (and will be for the sequel).

 

Minor correction: 1404 used Tages (? maybe SecuRom), not Uplay. The new game (2070) does use Uplay, but at least in a far more moderate form than the always on monstrosity it started as.

[Humodour]

I've gotta say, reading posts by people like Gorth and Volourn in this thread makes me want to go back to pirating. Thankfully, not everyone in game development and publishing has such childish and poorly developed opinions on this issue.

 

The CEO and cofounder of Valve is never short on opinions. As the creator of some of the most beloved games titles (Team Fortress 2, Portal, Half-Life) and owner of the most pervasive online gaming portal for the PC platform, Gabe Newell has earned the right to express them. In an interview for the University of Cambridge's school newspaper, Newell said that the way to end piracy is to provide a service that's more complete than cracked software, and that restrictive DRM only encourages more piracy.

 

"We think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy. Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem," he said. "If a pirate offers a product anywhere in the world, 24 x 7, purchasable from the convenience of your personal computer, and the legal provider says the product is region-locked, will come to your country 3 months after the US release, and can only be purchased at a brick and mortar store, then the pirate's service is more valuable."

 

The proof is in the proverbial pudding. "Prior to entering the Russian market, we were told that Russia was a waste of time because everyone would pirate our products. Russia is now about to become [steam's] largest market in Europe," Newell said.

 

The purpose of Steam is to provide as much value not only to the customer but also to other game publishers. "Our success comes from making sure that both customers and partners (e.g. Activision, Take 2, Ubisoft...) feel like they get a lot of value from those services, and that they can trust us not to take advantage of the relationship that we have with them."

 

While Newell offered candid observations on the risks of releasing Portal and the support Valve has provided with 150 updates to TF2 since 2007, he was not so loquacious when it came to questions about long-delayed Episode 3 of Half-Life 2. When asked whether it was a mistake to release episodic content for HL2, he merely said, "Not yet."

 

Oh, and Gabe? When is Half-Life 3 coming out?

 

"I don't know," he said.

 

As for those who think Steam's DRM is too restrictive... it's the best compromise out there for all parties involved. *shrug* So either buy the game then grab a DRM-free version somewhere else or vote with your wallet by not buying it. After a certain time the game will hopefully end up on GOG anyway.

[Hell Kitty]

Pirates are not competition. It's simply a question of not offering for sale a product that is worse than a pirate copy/ punishing legitimate customers relative to pirates. If you want to take a TWitcher2 approach and offer a bunch of extra stuff that's even better, but not really necessary.

 

More extended: they have to live in the world that exists, not the one they'd like to- fortunate really, as I'm sure most publishers would love to have persistent monitoring systems coupled to automatic monthly/ instant debits and 'Trusted Computing' style big brotherism; and for just about everything. What determines whether you are a profitable company is how many copies you sell, not how many copies are pirated, so if you take measures that cut into the number of people willing to buy you are hurting yourself. If pirates offer a free, less restricted and more convenient/stable experience you should at least try to tackle the two elements you can control rather than waving your arms and wishing real hard for a world in which piracy does not exist while coming up with ever more elaborate Rube-Goldstein schemes which just further worsen the other two factors.

 

 

I've gotta say, reading posts by people like Gorth and Volourn in this thread makes me want to go back to pirating. Thankfully, not everyone in game development and publishing has such childish and poorly developed opinions on this issue.

 

Considering piracy because you don't like the comments some people make is incredibly childish. Stones and glass houses.

[Gorth]

I've gotta say, reading posts by people like Gorth and Volourn in this thread makes me want to go back to pirating. Thankfully, not everyone in game development and publishing has such childish and poorly developed opinions on this issue.

Yes, you are such a shining beacon when it comes to maturity

 

Looks more and more like the future is going to be an either/or thing. Major titles will be available on cloud computing type schemes where you can rent access to games running centrally somewhere and on the other end of the scale indie developers that can't afford/have no interest in this kind of distribution.

[Malcador]

I've gotta say, reading posts by people like Gorth and Volourn in this thread makes me want to go back to pirating. Thankfully, not everyone in game development and publishing has such childish and poorly developed opinions on this issue.

 

You scumbag!

 

Heh, probably true, although I think it'd have ended up that way regardless, companies love lock in after all. Kind of ironic that we'll be going back to that in that case.

[Humodour]

I've gotta say, reading posts by people like Gorth and Volourn in this thread makes me want to go back to pirating. Thankfully, not everyone in game development and publishing has such childish and poorly developed opinions on this issue.

Yes, you are such a shining beacon when it comes to maturity

 

And you're an old codger pointlessly railing against a changing world?

 

Looks more and more like the future is going to be an either/or thing. Major titles will be available on cloud computing type schemes where you can rent access to games running centrally somewhere and on the other end of the scale indie developers that can't afford/have no interest in this kind of distribution.

 

Yeah, there is definitely an or in there: or services like Steam will keep doing what they are doing so successfully to bring old-school PC gaming back into the mainstream.

[Gorth]

I've gotta say, reading posts by people like Gorth and Volourn in this thread makes me want to go back to pirating. Thankfully, not everyone in game development and publishing has such childish and poorly developed opinions on this issue.

Yes, you are such a shining beacon when it comes to maturity

 

And you're an old codger pointlessly railing against a changing world?

Is it really that bad not liking people with self entitlement issues? Feel free to enlighten me why it's a good trait.

[sorophx]

[Hurlshort]

Look, this is a thread about piracy. People keep trying to bring DRM into the argument. That isn't necessary. Forget trying to justify piracy. These are video games, there is never a justification for taking them without permission. Give it up.

 

We can happily discuss all the crappy DRM out there. I will rail about Ubisoft's crappy choices right alongside everyone. But at no point does DRM justify piracy. We have many avenues to fight DRM. We can stop buying the products, that's the big one. We can sign petitions. We can whine on the internet. All of those are actually effective, I have a hard time believing Ubisoft isn't rethinking their handling of the PC market. They may pull out entirely, but hopefully other publishers will take note of their failure.

 

Pirating doesn't help the cause at all. It just fulfills a selfish desire to play the game.

[Gorth]

@Hurlshot: Try checking out the interview, it is relatively on-topic. How piracy isn't the blessing for indie game makers that some people would like to make it out to be.

[sorophx]

Look, this is a thread about piracy. People keep trying to bring DRM into the argument.

but how can you talk about piracy without bringing in DRM? at first designed as a tool to combat piracy, today DRM is considered on of the things justifying illegal distribution. it's like the publishers had had this weapon that turned against them.

 

a lot of developers say that piracy has gotten extra points with the arrival of crappy DRM, because pirates today have a better product.

 

pretty soon it will become just like the "egg-chicken" dilemma; what came first, piracy or DRM

[Volourn]

"but how can you talk about piracy without bringing in DRM?"

 

Easy. because one doesn't have to be pro DRM to be anti piracy. Piracy ie. theft is for scumbag piece of crap losers. No matter what.

 

Some of the more intrusive DRM is wrong and those comapnies who use them deseve to lose their custromers until they change said polices. But,tm hat dioes NOT give thieves the right to steal the product.

 

Get it? Got it. Good.