Here is how you should manage DRM :

[deanej]

Then perhaps the publishers should go find some other way to make money. That's how free market capitalism works - if you can't compete, get out of the market; don't start stripping the consumer of rights. If the free market can't handle a particular good, it is best to acknowledge the situation and find an alternate solution.

For example, an open source engine could be created and the modding community could take it from there. There are enough cookie-cutter games out there that you would only effectively need a few engines to duplicate everything we have now.

 

[BobDole]

Then perhaps the publishers should go find some other way to make money. That's how free market capitalism works - if you can't compete, get out of the market; don't start stripping the consumer of rights. If the free market can't handle a particular good, it is best to acknowledge the situation and find an alternate solution.

For example, an open source engine could be created and the modding community could take it from there. There are enough cookie-cutter games out there that you would only effectively need a few engines to duplicate everything we have now.

Yeah, they are looking for solutions. Is having to activate the game online once and have Steam open (but still be offline if you want after the initial activation) that extreme? Every time anyone tries to add anything more than a disc check, people flip out. People flipped out over install limits for Red Alert 3. People got pissed over Starcraft 2 not having normal LAN and basically making it online. People get angry over anything that could be considered at all restricting when there needs to be something so every game doesn't get pirated to death. I'd agree some of the DRM is most definitely BS (Assassin's Creed II for example, where you have to be online all the time even though it's single player), but most of it really is just an attempt to find a solution to the problem of developing on the PC platform. There's a reason why there's more focus on consoles and less on PCs.....

As for the data mining, whatever...even Tom himself admitted that they aren't doing anything like taking some actually useful data (and that it's just game data), just that they reportedly could if they really wanted to. I'm not sure that even worth any cause for concern right now, and the day they do that, then fine, just uninstall Steam and never buy another Steam related game or something. Can't freak out about every single "possibility".

 

[deanej]

And it's been shown again and again that DRM doesn't stop piracy. Please stop believing the industry's propaganda.

 

[BobDole]

And it's been shown again and again that DRM doesn't stop piracy. Please stop believing the industry's propaganda.

It doesn't always help (hell, it made Spore worse in terms of piracy, for example) but it doesn't mean it never helps, and it doesn't mean they should just throw their hands up and not even try to strike a nice balance between stopping at least some piracy (if they can make things even slightly better, it helps them make more money) and still not restricting customers. Should the game industry just give up and never try anything and just hope that not too many people pirate their stuff? It's either try some new things (like Steam, which really isn't too bad compared to most forms of DRM and is pretty user friendly) or just give up on the PC platform altogether (which has happened and is continuing to happen, in case you haven't noticed).

 

[deanej]

I think they should just live up to the fact that even if they somehow managed to reduce piracy to 0, only a small fraction of the former pirates will buy their games. Contrary to popular belief, pirates aren't just people saying "I can pay $X or get it free, so I'll get it free". Pirates typically don't feel that the game is worth what the publisher is asking. If they couldn't get a pirated version, they would just go without. I know this goes against everything the publishers tell you, but it's the truth. The real purpose of DRM is control, plain and simple.

Steam is actually just as intrusive as SecuROM, it just has better PR. Just like SecuROM, it mucks around with your computer's drivers. It even scans non-steam executables and if it finds what it believes to be an illegal executable, even if its totally unrelated to steam, it will deactivate your account.

 

[2K Greg]

Steam is actually just as intrusive as SecuROM, it just has better PR. Just like SecuROM, it mucks around with your computer's drivers. It even scans non-steam executables and if it finds what it believes to be an illegal executable, even if its totally unrelated to steam, it will deactivate your account.

I believe Steam only monitors your running processes when you are using VAC.

 

[deanej]

Just the OP of this thread.

 

[epicivfreak]

Since you can't "electronically transfer" a bound book, there is no need on the concern of the publisher. No one is going to go out and copy the book to give to their friends, or even to sell to others. That would cost real money.

Ever hear of torrents? Go to any torrent site and you can find thousands of books that people have purchased, unbound, scanned and then proceed to give away in pdf format. Often this occurs the same day the book goes on sale, just as with software.

It doesn't always help (hell, it made Spore worse in terms of piracy, for example) but it doesn't mean it never helps, and it doesn't mean they should just throw their hands up and not even try to strike a nice balance between stopping at least some piracy (if they can make things even slightly better, it helps them make more money) and still not restricting customers. Should the game industry just give up and never try anything and just hope that not too many people pirate their stuff? It's either try some new things (like Steam, which really isn't too bad compared to most forms of DRM and is pretty user friendly) or just give up on the PC platform altogether (which has happened and is continuing to happen, in case you haven't noticed).

All forms of DRM that have been conceived have been circumvented thus far. Steam is probably no different, somebody's probably found a way around it. I don't know for sure, but I haven't looked for it either. If it hasn't been done yet, it will be done eventually. So yes, the industry should just give up and stop using DRM, it only hurts honest customers anyway. Do you really think that consoles don't suffer from pirating? That's just being naive. So any game creator who gets out of the PC market to go to the console market is also being naive.

 

[BobDole]

All forms of DRM that have been conceived have been circumvented thus far. Steam is probably no different, somebody's probably found a way around it. I don't know for sure, but I haven't looked for it either. If it hasn't been done yet, it will be done eventually. So yes, the industry should just give up and stop using DRM, it only hurts honest customers anyway. Do you really think that consoles don't suffer from pirating? That's just being naive. So any game creator who gets out of the PC market to go to the console market is also being naive.

I never said it was uncircumventable (nor are consoles, although there's much less piracy on them, which is one of the reasons why they have become more appealing) but if Steam is more resistant to piracy, even if it can deter some people who don't want to wait for a crack/go through the extra work and end up buying the game legitimately, then that helps the developers, and so I can't really blame them. The whole DRM thing isn't just going away, at some point people are going to have to accept that. It doesn't mean that we should accept all forms of DRM, but there has to be some sort of compromise, and I think Steam's a pretty good one.

 

[Tylerryan79]

The best drm I have heard mentioned on these threads is Stardocks for galactive civ 2, I think you could install and play with no drm, but in order to get patches and use online features ect you had to register. Stuff like that gives people an incentive to buy the game. I know there are still flaws with this, but its going in the right direction.

Drm is just a control system, and Steam is so far the best at it. It has greatly helped remove pc games from discs to data, and then that data can be directly linked to you, with no resale or trade or giveaway possible. That way they sell more copies. If i where steam i"d wait another 10 years, close steam down, everyone would loose their games, the id open up Ice.... The New place to download/play with friends yada yada its great buy some games!!

 

[tom2050]

But you are purchasing a license to play the game.

I can't say it better than this, so I'll quote it:

First of all, no EULA is above the law. Music and software publishers may have managed to muddle the waters on intellectual rights so let me use a clear example: books. Paying a fair price for a book does not give the intellectual rights to the...contents but it does make the copy I bought mine. I can resell it, gift it to a library, lent it to a friend, keep it forever or burn it. It is mine because I paid for it.
Now, try doing any of the above with a STEAMed game. Why is it not possible?

STEAM (and any other form of DRM that limits the number of activations and/or prevent the legal transfer of ownership of any one of our items) effectively steals back the ownership of the items we paid fair prices for and ALLOWS us to use them only for as long as they deem convenient or profitable or possible (whichever comes first).

And any agreement under duress is null and void to begin with - even more so when it is vague and unclear. The EULA is only available AFTER one opens the box and, thus, rendering the product worthless. In other words, agreement to the EULA is only reached under the threat of financial loss, that is, making the game you just bought worthless. If you do not agree with the EULA you can neither get a refund nor use the product you bought as intended.
Moreover, nowhere in the EULA (or the product description) does it state that "paying for this physical or digital product only gives you rental rights in return". No, for the price that games used to SELL now such DRM schemes want us to RENT our games.

Valve has stated themselves that DRM increases Piracy, and that 'DRM is just dumb'. Yet they use DRM, and hidden layers of DRM most don't even know about. It's all PR of telling half the truth. They claim to be transparent, but we all know what 2K has done with DRM in the past, so 2K along with DRM means nothing good will come of it without an uproar.

My thread on Valve's plans of auto-updating your hardware drivers, checking non-Steam exe files for illegal content on your hard drive and closing your account if it thinks it finds one (guilty until you prove yourself innocent) if you put a non-Steam game to play with Steam, implied plans of data-mining Customer Demographics (not game play) without consent (as Blizzard did), and other intrusive techniques is no longer available... but these all are things anyone should be concerned with in relation to keeping their 'Privacy' intact.

 

[Tylerryan79]

And any agreement under duress is null and void to begin with - even more so when it is vague and unclear. The EULA is only available AFTER one opens the box and, thus, rendering the product worthless. In other words, agreement to the EULA is only reached under the threat of financial loss, that is, making the game you just bought worthless. If you do not agree with the EULA you can neither get a refund nor use the product you bought as intended.
Moreover, nowhere in the EULA (or the product description) does it state that "paying for this physical or digital product only gives you rental rights in return". No, for the price that games used to SELL now such DRM schemes want us to RENT our games.


No one should argue with this.... Its perfect in my book.

 

[Aeon221]

The best drm I have heard mentioned on these threads is Stardocks for galactive civ 2, I think you could install and play with no drm, but in order to get patches and use online features ect you had to register. Stuff like that gives people an incentive to buy the game. I know there are still flaws with this, but its going in the right direction.

Two points:

1) Patches for GalCiv2 were cracked and DLable within hours of them being up for legitimate users

2) Brad's company now uses their own Steamalike called Impulse (which is also pretty nice, but then I'm not a Steam fearing luddite)

3) Stardock's game development budget, and the flexibility to be all loosey goosey with DRM, comes from their extremely profitable and successful Windows modification business -- essentially, that you can buy to customize or add functionality to your Windows desktop

The most important anti-piracy tool in Stardock's arsenal is its development of a positive image in a niche group of hard-core strategy game buyers, and its nigh on constant involvement with that group through forums, chats, and extensive betas and dev journals. It is extremely difficult and time intensive to maintain that level of community involvement without somehow screwing up, and essentially requires that the developmental lead also be the community manager.

Some of the other up and coming niche develishers (developer/publishers), like Paradox Interactive, work on a very similar model -- the lead developer is also the individual in charge of ensuring the community is kept involved in the development process through dev journals and regular communication on the forums.

The fundamental truth that both of these companies, and a few others, have realized, is that niche markets of extremely hardcore strategy gamers tend to be older in age, extremely loyal to a brand that courts them, with a good deal of disposable income to spend on games.


That sort of model wouldn't work for Civ5, which is a much more mainstream product aimed at a far wider -- and, on average, younger and therefore generally poorer -- audience. Rather than asking the Lead Dev of an incredibly large team to manage both development and community relations, the developer instead chooses to maintain a much lower profile online, replacing community involvement with a higher profile in the established media. The extensive modding community takes over the role of responsive developer in many ways, helping to drive sales by increasing the perceived product value.

This increased distance between player and developer base has the unfortunate result of significantly decreasing the perceived need to support the game/developers, thereby resulting in a far lower per unit profitability than you'd expect to see on more niche titles. DRM more broadly is an attempt to convert more non-paying users to paying users, thus improving per unit profitability and mildly to moderately improving the return on the game itself, depending on how one models the effect of DRM.

Steam is an incredibly successful attempt to combine carrot and stick to convert more piracy to sales, improving per unit profitability. The low profile of the DRM aspect, the unobtrusiveness of the client itself, the consolidation of both games library and patching, their strong support for independent developers, and their regular and aggressive discounts (intended to expand their network and increase sales volume) are all significant carrots in their favor. That games are also somewhat to moderately more difficult to crack due to Steam is a bonus, but not nearly so significant as the strong network of Steam users, which tends to exert positive peer pressure on potential pirates, who, after all, want to play the game with their friends as much as the next person, and cannot do so on legitimate servers with their friends if they do not themselves have a legitimate copy.


The long and skinny is that Stardock is a difficult act to copy for other devs, and uses its own Steam-like DRM. That Steam's DRM is more the positive peer pressure of the network. And that Steam is far superior to a DRM scheme that has more in common with a rootkit than a dongle key (aka the first post's reference to the incredibly draconian Alpha Protocol DRM).

 

[Tylerryan79]

I just went to school, and got a lesson in drm haha. Seriously though, the only drm ive ever had my whole life was cd-keys and disc checks. That was in the early to mid 90s. I then stopped pc gaming, went to consoles, up to the original xbox. Then when fallout 3 came out i bought it and a new pc. Then I got civ iv soon after. Fallout 3 had windows live, and i just had to make an offline account and i could play, with the disc in. and civ iv had no drm. So as you can see Ive been out of the loop. I miss the simple drms i guess, before when i knew what it was lol. I cant speak for other people, but I didnt grow up with steam ect, or anything like it. If it was there it passed me by. I would love for a company to cater to me, but I know im a minority, in the majority that likes being connected 24/7 ect. I can live with steam as drm, but its definetly not the same experiance for me as it is with the vast majority of users. But in the end if I start buying cheap games, playing MP ect. then steam has done its job. Id just rather it didnt.

 

[arstal]

Two points:

1) Patches for GalCiv2 were cracked and DLable within hours of them being up for legitimate users

2) Brad's company now uses their own Steamalike called Impulse (which is also pretty nice, but then I'm not a Steam fearing luddite)

3) Stardock's game development budget, and the flexibility to be all loosey goosey with DRM, comes from their extremely profitable and successful Windows modification business -- essentially, that you can buy to customize or add functionality to your Windows desktop


That sort of model wouldn't work for Civ5, which is a much more mainstream product aimed at a far wider -- and, on average, younger and therefore generally poorer -- audience. Rather than asking the Lead Dev of an incredibly large team to manage both development and community relations, the developer instead chooses to maintain a much lower profile online, replacing community involvement with a higher profile in the established media. The extensive modding community takes over the role of responsive developer in many ways, helping to drive sales by increasing the perceived product value.

This increased distance between player and developer base has the unfortunate result of significantly decreasing the perceived need to support the game/developers, thereby resulting in a far lower per unit profitability than you'd expect to see on more niche titles. DRM more broadly is an attempt to convert more non-paying users to paying users, thus improving per unit profitability and mildly to moderately improving the return on the game itself, depending on how one models the effect of DRM.


The long and skinny is that Stardock is a difficult act to copy for other devs, and uses its own Steam-like DRM. That Steam's DRM is more the positive peer pressure of the network. And that Steam is far superior to a DRM scheme that has more in common with a rootkit than a dongle key (aka the first post's reference to the incredibly draconian Alpha Protocol DRM).

Stardock's act is only difficult if you're a shovelware company. Firaxis could do it easily.

Also, Impulse has some large differences from Steam in how it does things, differences that do make a legitimate difference. I prefer Gamersgate to Impulse all things being even, but Impulse is fine. Steam isn't.

The Civ 5 audience and Stardock/Paradox audience are probably the same demographically. Civ isn't MW2.

Also, Stardock made eight-digit profit on GalCiv2, so it's not like they had to afford to be loosey-goosey. They made a smart business choice. Impulse is profitable.

To me, Steam is an intrusive DRM that is backed by a large and vocal Steam Sunshine Squad that buys the hype.

 

[frekk]

I am referring to a driver's license, and you are referring to the title, I believe.

Since you can't "electronically transfer" a bound book, there is no need on the concern of the publisher. No one is going to go out and copy the book to give to their friends, or even to sell to others.

No, in another age, before our collective intelligence had dwindled to little better than that of cows, people came up with this unique idea on how hundreds or even thousands of people could read a book for free, with the purchase of just a single copy; the P2P network of the 17th century.

They called it a "public library".

 

[frekk]

The EULA is only available AFTER one opens the box and, thus, rendering the product worthless.

I see your point, but there are other ways to discover the nature of the EULA. Not that anyone actually reads them, anyway. You have to be a lawyer to parse a EULA properly.

The main problem is ownership. You can't sell the game that you've bought, or even give it away. "Ownership" of property - any sort of property, be it real estate or a car or a book or whatever - is actually defined by the ability to sell something. If you can't sell it, you DO NOT own it. You merely possess it.

 

[tom2050]

Stardock's act is only difficult if you're a shovelware company. Firaxis could do it easily.

Stardock does it, because Stardock wants to. I remember seeing Frogboy on the forums all the time, never knew who it was at the time, and was surprised when I found out! That is the big difference. When the group wants to do such a thing, they create their own success with it. If Firaxis did it to try to emulate Stardock, they would probably fail at it, unless they were personally motivated for the right reasons.

Look at Bethesda, they released the ultra bug ridden Fallout 3 for PS3, that is broken beyond broken to the point of unplayability, and those forums are stock full of complaints and pleas from members to fix the problem, and Bethesda did not ever even give a single response, or a fix.

Most companies do not care at all, few care a little bit at certain times (such as providing pre-game release hype which doesn't even count), and almost none actually care about their customers to the point of wanting to do it. That is why Stardock gets my cash and Bethesda gets no more money from me.

 

[The_J]

and civ iv had no drm.

Look again at the box, you're wrong .

And Windows Live is also a real abomination .

 

[arstal]

Stardock does it, because Stardock wants to. I remember seeing Frogboy on the forums all the time, never knew who it was at the time, and was surprised when I found out! That is the big difference. When the group wants to do such a thing, they create their own success with it. If Firaxis did it to try to emulate Stardock, they would probably fail at it, unless they were personally motivated for the right reasons.

Look at Bethesda, they released the ultra bug ridden Fallout 3 for PS3, that is broken beyond broken to the point of unplayability, and those forums are stock full of complaints and pleas from members to fix the problem, and Bethesda did not ever even give a single response, or a fix.

Most companies do not care at all, few care a little bit at certain times (such as providing pre-game release hype which doesn't even count), and almost none actually care about their customers to the point of wanting to do it. That is why Stardock gets my cash and Bethesda gets no more money from me.

The thing is, Stardock's not really saints. They do what they do, because they think it maakes them more money. Brad Wardell admitted today that if he was doing a FPS, he'd put nasty DRM on it. (Elemental blog)