Hated and Broken

By Rob Fahey Published 19 October, 2008

Everyone hates DRM, but not everyone will admit it doesn't work.

Published as part of our sister-site GamesIndustry.biz' widely-read weekly newsletter, the GamesIndustry.biz Editorial is a weekly dissection of one of the issues weighing on the minds of the people at the top of the games business. It appears on Eurogamer after it goes out to GI.biz newsletter subscribers.

John Riccitiello hates DRM. That's the rather surprising news from the Electronic Arts CEO this week - surprising not because there's anything particularly likeable about DRM, but because of his own firm's immense attachment to the widely disliked (and utterly useless) technology.

Admittedly, Riccitiello's comments go a lot deeper than that convenient headline. Despite the fact that he "hates" DRM, he goes on to attempt to justify it - comparing it with locks on your door or other necessary evils which we all require for security.

The comparison is utterly flawed. Locks and keys are indeed a trade-off which we make between convenience and security, but they are designed to protect our own security - not that of the company that sold us the door. There is a real, tangible advantage to the person being inconvenienced. That doesn't exist with DRM.

In fact, DRM is even worse. Not only is there no advantage to the end-user - in exchange for what can be pretty shocking inconvenience, which even Riccitiello confesses is "cumbersome". There's also no real advantage to the company responsible for inflicting this inconvenience, because contrary to Riccitiello's assertion, the DRM solutions used by the industry at large don't actually provide any meaningful protection from piracy.

The proof? Well, you can take the various charts and graphs presented by the companies trying to sell you DRM with which to lock up your products - almost none of whom even claim to be able to protect you past the first few days on sale, and frankly, even those claims are rather spurious. On the other side of the balance, you can put the fact that the Bittorrent "swarms" for Spore, EA's most recent and most controversial DRM-locked product, were among the biggest ever seen for a new videogame.

This alone makes another of Riccitiello's assertions look a little peculiar. He reckons that of those who kicked up a storm about Spore's DRM - which spilled from negative Amazon reviews into the specialist press, and even into the mainstream media in a small way - "about half" were pirates.

Why, exactly, would pirates care about Spore's DRM? If your intention was to pirate the game, there was a perfectly functional copy, totally unencumbered by DRM, sitting up there for you on Bittorrent - for free - on the day of launch. No pirate, with the possible exception of the person who originally uploaded the game to the Internet, ever saw Spore's DRM.

This is the essential, deeply uncomfortable truth about DRM which I and many, many other commentators have been banging on about for years. No pirate on the planet gives a damn about it, because they're happily using an unencumbered copy. The only people who ever see DRM - the only people who ever suffer the "cumbersome" inconvenience of these deeply flawed technologies - are your legitimate, paying, long-suffering customers.

Of course, it's not like the videogames industry stands alone in making this mistake. The film industry has spent years putting unskippable ads on the front of its DVDs, forcing legitimate, paying customers to endure lengthy, over-wrought messages about the evils of piracy. Had they downloaded the film from the Internet or picked up a pirate DVD, of course, they wouldn't have to put up with such nonsense. The irony is harsh, and continues to fly completely over the heads of whatever clueless individuals demand the inclusion of these ridiculous ads.

The music business, too, has made a similar error. You may recall that Sony and other companies spent ages experimenting with ways to prevent CDs from being copied onto computers - completely ignoring the fact that most people had upgraded their portable CD players to MP3 players. Those who legitimately bought music were being punished. Those who downloaded it from Napster (as then was) or other file-sharing services experienced no such restrictions.

More recently, the music business has insisted that Apple include DRM in tracks downloaded from the iTunes Music Store. If you are a legitimate, paying consumer of music online, you are restricted in what kind of devices you can use to listen to it, where you can listen to it and, potentially, for how long you can listen to it.

Were it to do so, Apple wouldn't be the first company to turn off its DRM after the business has wound down, leaving customers' music effectively dead on their hard drives, incapable of being copied elsewhere or played on a new system. Attempt to circumvent these restrictions, and you're a criminal under US law (and the law of many other countries). Had you pirated the music, certainly, you'd be a criminal in the first place - but you could do what you liked with it, and it would be yours forever.

The music business, thankfully, is waking up from this blatantly idiotic state of affairs. Increasingly, it is offering unencumbered MP3s from online stores such as Amazon's (and, in some cases, iTunes). John Riccitiello would presumably recoil in horror at such a concept - after all, he reckons that without the protection of DRM, EA would be "in business for free". Yet music companies - some of them far bigger and far, far more experienced than EA - clearly disagree.

They've recognised an essential truth which the videogames industry desperately needs to grasp. You cannot protect media products through technological means. In an arms race with determined pirates - many of them simply hobbyists working from their bedrooms for no reward other than kudos, and nigh-on impossible to track down - technology firms will lose every single time. If cunning hackers can crack the protection of closed, custom-designed hardware systems like the Xbox 360, the Wii and the PlayStation Portable, what hope does a software system running on a completely open platform like the PC have?

There are ways to stop pirates in their tracks, but they're all business solutions, not technical solutions. World of Warcraft is correctly fingered by Riccitiello as a perfect example (although he inaccurately describes it as "DRM", which it isn't - in fact, WOW notably contains no DRM worth a damn, and you can happily copy the game client around, install it on multiple PCs, lend the discs to your friends and so on). Relying on subscriptions for your income, with upfront sales being little more than padding on the numbers, is a perfect business strategy to minimise piracy - although of course, it only works for very specific types of product.

You could also try increasing the value of your retail product to make it worthwhile to buy it, rather than stealing it. Include one-time use codes which download in-game extras, perhaps (although they'll get pirated too, you're now loading the dice in your own favour - pirates will have extra hassle to access the new content, your users will get it with ease). Create limited editions with genuinely worthwhile product in them, and watch your pre-orders soar. Hell, simply engage your community and build loyalty - consumers who like your brand and find your developers personable are a lot more likely to open their wallets than those who think you're the Evil Empire.

But before you do any of that, there's a Step One to this reform programme. It's pretty damned obvious. First, you stop selling your legitimate customers crippled, encumbered versions of your media, versions which are notably inferior to the versions they're being offered by the pirates.

Media companies can whinge and moan about pirates until the cows come home, but the simple reality is that while your paid-for version of a product is less functional and more annoying than the free pirate version, you're driving your customers into the welcoming arms of Bittorrent.

If we're really going to make inroads into converting pirate downloads into retail sales, then the industry's executives need to start thinking with those rational business heads they're meant to have - rather than with with their impotent sense of outrage and injustice - and drop this defective, useless technology.

For more views on the industry and to keep up to date with news relevant to the games business, read GamesIndustry.biz. You can sign up to the newsletter and receive the GamesIndustry.biz Editorial directly each Thursday afternoon.

Picture of Rob.

About Rob Fahey

Read more articles from Rob by visiting the Rob Fahey archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (124) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Law07 #1 3 years ago

    DRMLOL.


    FIRST.

  • RedboX #2 3 years ago

    I thought Spore was on available on BitTorrent sites available to download a few days before its official release.

  • HiddenPooh #3 3 years ago

    It's funny how nobody complains about M&S putting security tags on underpants - why are we not demainding an unencumbered shopping experience?

  • stuarty_2003 #4 3 years ago

    Completely agree with the article.

    Would it also not cost publishers less to make a game if they didn't pay licenses for the DRM in the first place?

    TW@s.

  • stuarty_2003 #5 3 years ago

    @HiddenPooh - they remove the tag when you buy it.

  • GiarcYekrub #6 3 years ago

    Who's working sunday?

    Cool artical. No mention of the second hand market though

    Pirates click here

  • DFawkes #7 3 years ago

    It's like they've forgotten we're the customers, we're the ones in control of what we buy and when we play it. You start using technology to dictate how we use our own purchases, you've overstepped the mark.

    I really hope the industry gets a grip soon and scraps DRM in all it's forms.

  • cjb110 #8 3 years ago

    What I don't get is why they think they can make successful DRM?

    You can't protect something from someone with a lock if you give them the key. Esp when actually you need them to get at the something!

    Ok they make things complicated like the bluray and hddvd stuff, but that only means the consumer is worse off, slower loading discs, no playback in macs, borked playback on PC's...

    On PC's I think the Steam approach is the best, and the big thing missing from steam is the ability to tie physical copies (like the limited editions) to the steam accounts.

  • GiarcYekrub #9 3 years ago

    @ HiddenPooh I never understood why people buy clothes with a hole it so a security tag could be attached.

  • Lexx87 #10 3 years ago

    \o/

  • VMerken #11 3 years ago

    The situation is quite simple:

    (1) Video game companies have every right to protect their products
    (2) Customers have every right to protect their possessions, i.e. not allow intrusion on their property

    As you can see, both parties are in their right, but a bit of a situation will occur if the video game companies use point (1) to deploy intrusive DRM (Starforce, SecuRom's recent iterations, etc.). Since this DRM is by definition intrusive, customers may bring up point (2) to justify them returning the product for a full refund.

    I never had to do this in the past for games I was interested in, but since Bioshock PC (and more recently Crysis: Warhead PC) I have been doing it regularly. So what if I can't play the video game, there are plenty of other video games with (what I deem to be) non-intrusive DRM around, I'll just waste my time on those.

    Finally, if a company deploys this kind of DRM because it doesn't trust you anymore, then why the F**K should you trust that company?
    Edited by 2 at 19/10/08 @ 11:00

  • GrandpaUlrira #12 3 years ago

    Maybe it's because the tags on the underpants don't then attach themselves to you when you put on the underpants, and then cause problems with previously working features? Whatever those 'features' might be.

  • Joel_The_Mole #13 3 years ago

    (potato_fan) "/adjusts eye patch"



    hahaha.

    Does that mean that iTunes can potentially make my music 'dead'?

  • Freek #14 3 years ago

    Fantastic article! What would be good as a follow up is to interview some industrie big wigs and genuinly try to ask why they think DRM is a good idea when all the evidence presented to them states otherwise? What are these people thinking?

  • miiiguel #15 3 years ago

    Best thing to do is to ostracize those pseudo-gamers. Fuck them.

  • Chufty #16 3 years ago

    DRM isn't there to protect against bittorrent piracy. It protects against people lending discs to friends and selling their games second hand. Both of which are dark, sinister crimes that should be punishable by death.

    You also have to consider the role of investors, who have no idea how piracy, DRM or even videogames themselves work, but aren't going to invest in software without DRM any more than they would invest in a property with no door locks. If you don't satisfy the investors, you can't raise the capital to develop the game.

  • Shakey_Jake33 #17 3 years ago

    @HiddenPooh - If we're going to use that analogy, then what if you bought the underpants, but the tag had to stay attached on? If the DRM was removed on purchase, then your analogy would be comparable.

  • Horse #18 3 years ago

    At least iTunes allows you to legally circumvent their DRM by burning the protected tracks on to CD. There's nothing to stop you then re-ripping the burnt tracks back into iTunes with no protection.

    The hassle involved seems enough to prevent most people doing it I guess.

  • Optyk #19 3 years ago

    Can anyone link me to a guide on how to untinstall DRM after ive uninstalled Spore?

  • 4thVariety #20 3 years ago

    Why are we still buying into the argument of DRM being used as protection against pirates. DRM and copylocks did not work 20 years ago, they are not working now in terms of stopping piracy. If they are still employed nonetheless, we have to assume that DRM is causing the effect publishers want. That might not be the effect of stopping piracy which we are being told by the publishers!

    As a consumer I notice some things and not just since yesterday. You can't sell your old games in the glorious age of digital distribution and limited activations. Steam is the perfect way of putting an end to developers being cut out from reselling, simply by being able to remove any form of lending or reselling single games. PC multiplayer is also very restrictive. Every console can connect more than one controller, games ever offer split-screen and gamesharing (on handhelds) to make as many people play the game as humanly possible. Efforts on the PC, including DRM, all aim at making every single player pay. We wonder why PC games suffer defeat at the face of console games day after day, what we never do is sit down in front of a PC and play together. That's not a limitation of the platform, that is a limitation of the mindset of the developers making games for the PC platform.

    The more we chase our tail in an endless DRM vs. Piracy discussion, we neglect the fact that DRM infringes on what we held to be a truth. "If I buy a game, I own it, I can give it to a friend when I want to and I can sell it on eBay when I want to". It's no surprise that the current DRM under fire (SecureRom) is made by Sony, a company that tried to outlaw used game sales in Japan. PC games try to turn themselves into "service agreements" which only allow me to "rent" the game for a flat fee eternally. That's also the real advantage a PS3 or 360 game still has today. It's worth more in the eye of the customer because it has an attached safety net. The knowledge of being able to sell the damn thing if it's a stinker.

    Show me the DRM that allows for that, show me Steam being able to pull that off, or the new EA DRM solutions. Then I might be inclined to believe it's all about DRM vs. Priacy. Until that day we have judge DRM for what it really does. Stop us from selling a purchase we regret and thereby create a player of the game that did not pay the publisher. Sounds profitable enough for me, pirates aside.

  • knightmt #21 3 years ago

    DRM is as nasty attempt to solve an expensive problem.
    If a game is worth so much why are there not more USB dongles,
    it would work a lot better than having to install spyware and or leaving a cd in the drive.

  • Shakey_Jake33 #22 3 years ago

    ^That would of course be crackable too, quite quickly.

    The reality is the combating piracy with an iron fist isn't going to work, they have the fight piracy with a superior product. Steam is very successful. It still suffers from piracy, but also has a very dedicated community because there are tangible benefits to purchasing a game through Steam. For example, you can access your content from any machine in the world, as long as you log in. Your purchase is also tied to your account (i.e. you, the customer) rather than a non-permenent variable such as computer hardware (which EA's approach is based around).

  • Ryze #23 3 years ago

    True. There should be an EA dongle that spares every legit customer the DRM install limit, CD in drive nonsense.

  • GiarcYekrub #24 3 years ago

    I keep hearing worring things about EA's Downloader service I've got CC3 and CC3:KW on that but I haven't installed it for awhile since I reinstalled windows. Is there something I should know? Its allowed me reinstall in the past.

  • butler` #25 3 years ago

    DRM is so 2005

  • DodgyPast #26 3 years ago

    I believe EA's download service only lets you re-download the content for 6 months, after that you have to purchase it again.

    Thank you EG for putting this up, it's nice to see you supporting the consumers and publicising the issues we face due to this. It would be even better if as mentioned before you went a bit deeper by interviewing someone in EA and asking some hard questions about their desires to cripple the 2nd hand market.

    My final comment is that the one time codes thing is a nightmare, and I've seen that this is coming over to the consoles as well in a further attempt to cripple 2nd hand sales. It would be nice to actually drag the truth out of these executives who love to hide behind lies and deceptions regarding their desire to offer the minimum value possible in order to maximise their profits no matter how much this hurts the consumer.

    Long gone is the time when anybody was proud of the enjoyment their product provided to their consumers, instead they only have pride in the amount of profit they make.
    Edited by 1 at 19/10/08 @ 12:19

  • bdc #27 3 years ago

    Hear hear

  • Xerx3s #28 3 years ago

    "Besides, I personally don't feel guilty about it because I don't do it. Plus you can actually skip it to the FACT page in recent years. Factcheck moar!"

    Eh? None of my dvd's allow that.

    "It's funny how nobody complains about M&S putting security tags on underpants - why are we not demainding an unencumbered shopping experience?"

    What a stupid and completely unrelated comparison.

  • Plughead #29 3 years ago

    I completely agree with the article. Sensible, reasoned and inarguable points that nobody with a brain can find fault with.

  • Jamo777 #30 3 years ago

    Imagine if the print media behaved like movie, game and music companies: link

  • Asundai #31 3 years ago

    Completely agree with this. DRM doesn't effect pirates at all. Ok, so it might stop someone from casually lending a game to a friend or whatever, but i don't think that's a major problem and all they need to do is download a crack anyway (not difficult). It's just a waste of money as is.

    Piracy is a bit of a problem at the moment but DRM isn't the answer. The only thing that seems to work is good support for the product after release, subscriptions, or multiplayer games that can't easily be played online with an illegitimate copy. Offering an inferior product to paying customers definitely isn't the way to go.

  • StixxUK #32 3 years ago

    Maybe some day soon they'll make the DRM so ridiculously constricting that everyone will stand up and pirate the game instead and they'll have to do away with it forever.

  • Nithron #33 3 years ago

    Chufty:
    You also have to consider the role of investors, who have no idea how piracy, DRM or even videogames themselves work, but aren't going to invest in software without DRM any more than they would invest in a property with no door locks. If you don't satisfy the investors, you can't raise the capital to develop the game.

    I'm pretty sure that hits the nail on the head. It's the only reasonable explanation for this continued idiocy.

    @StixxUK: That kinda already happened with Spore. Their reaction was "Quick! Add more DRM!"

    I'm sick of people blaming pirates for this DRM problem. It doesn't affect pirates at all. The only people responsible are the idiots that keep adding it to their games.

    Personally, I just don't buy games that have this insane level of DRM in them. Which is a shame, as I was genuinely going to buy Spore, Crysis Warhead and Red Alert 3.

  • BurningR #34 3 years ago

    @4thVariety

    That's the most insightful and precise comment about the purpose of DRM I have ever heard. You nailed it.

  • bad09 #35 3 years ago

    Good article, PC is dead to me now. As a consumer I hate DRM. I pay I do what the hell I want with it! The music industry has been disowned never to see my money again after their internet police bully boy tactics. For me the anti-piracy measures are actually pushing people to piracy!

    / problem with talking piracy though is the inevitable "piracy is theft hang 'em!" dogmatic thinking. Until that goes away we can't look at the problem and it's causes - the biggest being PRICE you nimrods!!!!!!

  • Eraser #36 3 years ago

    excellent article.

  • Chalee #37 3 years ago

    I think the anti-piracy advert before films is so awesome it actually makes piracy looks cool and ecourages me to pirate stuff!

  • Dynamize #38 3 years ago

    I've always been of the opinion that DRM's crap, but if there's a game you really want to play, what're you gonna do? I've not come a cropper because of DRM so far, apart from a lack of peace of mind.

    I've rather had enough of it all now though. I was really looking forward to Dead Space, but I'm not going to be playing it after all. Can't tacitly approve of EA's draconian approach to DRM.

    I can completely understand and endorse companies wanting to protect their copyright, but that endorsement stops when it inconveniences me and sets a crappy precedent regarding the consumer's right to fair, unencumbered use of the product honestly purchased.

  • Eraysor #39 3 years ago

    This article is a winrar.

  • Ryuken #40 3 years ago

    An article like this is always nice but wouldn't it have more effect if EG and pretty much every other games magazine out there started digging more (contacting the copy protection companies and confront them with the inefficiency and user unfriendly parts of their 'solutions') or would mention it somehow in their PC articles? Publishers won't give a toss about a single editorial but they will look at the whole problem in another way if the media starts to condemn them for it where it hurts: in the reviews.

    Although it's incredibly silly imo to skip titles because they have a certain form of DRM included (you might as well say you'll never play any singleplayer PC game anymore, DRM=/=the game) that still doesn't mean we have to approve of it and of all the unknown incompatibilities that might rise if not now then perhaps later on a new OS or machine (just try an old Starforce or Tages game on Vista and watch the horror unfold). You shouldn't spoil the actual review text with this constant DRM-talk of course but just some clearly visible information in a sidebar somewhere would be nice, just like accurate system specs btw.

    If you're so concerned about PC gaming you might as well start by making EG more of a respectful PC gaming site.
    Edited by 1 at 19/10/08 @ 14:35

  • Fleisch #41 3 years ago

    I'm sure its been mentioned somewhere in the mass of postings, but really have got bored trawling through comments about underpants.....so....STEAM.

    Its a simple, effective, low cost solution. Steam.

    I don't care if EA copy the Steam verification system verbatum (though valve might) but seriously, ffs, no secureROM yet no piracy of significant note. Steam, Steam motherf*$!%ing Steam.
    Edited by 1 at 19/10/08 @ 14:39

  • CARL05 #42 3 years ago

    Plus you can actually skip it to the FACT page in recent years...!"

    Eh? None of my dvd's allow that.

    You have to use the 'fast-forward' button, hitting it more than once should increase the speed. It will stop when it gets to the FACT screen which only lasts a couple of seconds :)



    ...and since i'm here; I vote death to DRM!

  • Ralfst3r #43 3 years ago

    Very nice and constructive article.

  • UKGN_Zoidberg #44 3 years ago

    I've not had any problem with the DRM on Spore. I bought the game, installed it and when it asked me to register online I just skipped that bit and didn't bother!

    Hasn't stopped me from enjoying the game one bit.

  • michaelius #45 3 years ago

    Good to see truth spoken on big gaming site.

    As for EA I'm going to make sure everything I buy from them is used console version if they put DRM on PC port. That way I'm still fully legal and those assholes don't get even a broken cent (or penny:) ) from me.

  • hiddenranbir #46 3 years ago

    No mention of Stardock or Valve's approach?

  • Krun #47 3 years ago

    One day everything will be free. I predict this will happen within the next 75-100 years.

    The real next stage in our cultural evolution is to move away from money based ownership systems (a kind of forced slavery) into a technology based culture that provides everything we need. Art, games, other entertainment and everything else humans do well, willb e made because we need something to do. Giving away software will be a natural upshot of some cool guys wanting to make something great, and everyone who uses it will cheer them as heroes.
    Edited by 1 at 19/10/08 @ 16:49

  • digiwalsh #48 3 years ago

    Still haven't purchased spore for this reason and this reason alone.

  • karstux #49 3 years ago

    What a fine article. Well done, Rob Fahey! I just wonder how long it will take the decision-makers who force the DRM on the software to see the light. And it would be interesting indeed to see a reply from Riccitiello to this article.

  • karstux #50 3 years ago

    @UKGN_Zoidberg

    If you would, kindly read this thread, written by a poor fellow who's been bitten by Spore's DRM. Could happen to anyone, really. Imagine being at the mercy of an underpaid telephone support worker who gets to decide if your bought copy of the game should function or not.

  • Simian #51 3 years ago

    Nice to see that my favourite gaming site has the balls to question the DRM issue.

  • Tonka #52 3 years ago

    Where is that nutter that always shows up and says he is the master of all things that has to do with piracy and that no one else should talk about it until they read his rants? He always kicks off a good shitstorm with his smugness.

  • smelly #53 3 years ago

    I *Like* DRM and it DOES work...

    If you make piracy easy - every man and his dog does it (see dreamcast), If you make it harder.. they dont.. see 360/ps3/etc.

  • DodgyPast #54 3 years ago

    Did you buy a PC version of Spore smelly?

  • zathras #55 3 years ago

    Brilliant article - spot on.

  • SeesThroughAll #56 3 years ago

    I *Like* DRM and it DOES work...

    smelly, my respect for you went down the drain when I read that sentence...

    Read the article and think again for a minute.

  • Nithron #57 3 years ago

    @Smelly: DRM doesn't work on PC though, does it.

    That's why this article is in the PC section.

    Nobody really complains about the copy protection on consoles because it never really negatively affects anyone.

  • michaelius #58 3 years ago

    Yes there'a a bit of misconception in public about DRM - when people think and complain about DRM - it's about more extreme versions of it especially limited activations, spyware software (read starforce) etc while technically even check if cd is in the drive is still considered to be DRM.

  • 1simen1 #59 3 years ago

    One of the better Eurogamer articles i have read in a while. Good Work and i totally agree!!

  • Windsong #60 3 years ago

    UKGN_Zoidberg said:
    "I've not had any problem with the DRM on Spore. I bought the game, installed it and when it asked me to register online I just skipped that bit and didn't bother! Hasn't stopped me from enjoying the game one bit"

    Well just bc you like to TAKE it without any lube doesnt mean the other 99% of us will. You want to dance with the devil..fine, do so at your own peril. Dont attempt to drag us down with you.

    Besides, it really does say something about one's intellect when he says "I enjoy Spore!".

  • smelly #61 3 years ago

    "Nobody really complains about the copy protection on consoles because it never really negatively affects anyone. "


    Im still not convinced it negatively effects people on the pc either.

    This is just starforce all over again - where a few pirates start a witch hunt to make their lives easier.

  • BonzoBanana #62 3 years ago

    DRM reminds me of macrovision and a story I heard about a middleclass chap who had a nice sony dvd player but dvds he bought had a wavy image as it was connected to his vcr and then onto the tv which you shouldn't do because of macrovision but his old tv only had one AV socket. So he stopped buying legitimate dvds because they didn't work right. Anyway he chanced buying a dvd at a market as they were cheap and lo and behold it played perfectly on his setup. So he ended up buying a ton of pirate dvds from the market with no royalties at all going to the film companies. When his son discovered his hoard of pirate dvds he was quite shocked as he was a very honest person but the father didn't even think about them being pirates only the fact that his £200 dvd player was now actually fulfilling its purpose. Macrovision in this instance was the cause of turning an honest man into a pirate. DRM is another inconvenience which can cause piracy rather than prevent it.

  • paketep #63 3 years ago

    John Riccitiello hates DRM. That's the rather surprising news from the Electronic Arts CEO this week - surprising not because there's anything particularly likeable about DRM, but because of his own firm's immense attachment to the widely disliked (and utterly useless) technology.

    That's not news. It's just a blatant lie from a despicable person that has no problem lying to our faces. The only thing he cares about is stopping used sales, and if that causes a big inconvenience to his customers... FUCK THEM!

  • MoFo #64 3 years ago

    @Hiddenpooh: After you've worn your M&S clothes a few times do M&S come round to your door and say "Oi that's it. You've worn them four times now and that's your limit. If you want to wear them again you have to phone our premium customer support number."

    I wish I'd not bought Spore now. Other than the fact it was a lame game, I wish I'd not done my bit to make EA think their DRM is validated.

  • Tehren #65 3 years ago

    Those anti-piracy shorts on DVDs are great - with the girl who manages to download a movie in 2 seconds. I want that connection.

  • napalm68 #66 3 years ago

    Yeah, just like those obnoxious DVD anti piracy adds screamind at you:

    "YOU ARE A THIEF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" BWAHNNEEEENEEWAHWAHWAHWAHWAH!

    They are so loud and obnoxious. I have to scramble for the remotes - some let you fast forward, some don't so I have to mute the amp.

    All I think is jeez, I wish I was a pirate, I wouldn't be putting up with this shit.

    The ONLY decent anti piracy advertising I have ever seen is a thank you card inside a DVD, thanking me for purchasing a legitimate copy. I've only seen it once, and can't recall which one. But it had a more positive effect on me than some fuckers SCREAMING at me.

  • Nithron #67 3 years ago

    @Smelly: No, because it doesn't stop piracy. Like, at all.

  • IneptPercy #68 3 years ago

    Is it just me who has got, Bioshock and Crysis warhead on PC and really couldn't care less?

    My games installed no problems, they play no problems...

    To me as a PC gamer DRM isn't a problem, don't take this as I support it, I just think its getting blown out of proportion.

  • JonFE #69 3 years ago

    Wasn't there a -now debunked- rumour that Sony was thinking about implementing a feature that would tie up disk-based games to your PS3, in order to cripple the second-hand market? Remember the uproar it caused?

    Anyway, I fully appreciate that publishers (and developers, to a lesser degree maybe) are hurt by the second-hand market and piracy. Sure enough dedicated pirates cannot be fully stopped, maybe delayed a bit in some cases (clearly not evident in the case of Spore). The second-hand market and casual "pirates" (those that would lend a game to their friends or relatives) though, can be discouraged by DRM and other security measures. On the other hand, so can legitimate users, especially since the PC is an open architecture where many things can go wrong and frequent clean OS installations are common practice - it's a no-win situation.

    Bottom line is that a system similar to Steam, where you can install your games wherever and whenever you like, is something that most of us could live with and it can be used on disk-based and downloaded games alike. Why would EA choose to pay extra loyalties to SecuROM and piss off their customers in the process is beyond me. They could just pay Valve for Steam and be done with it.

    There will be a time when average Joe will question why the original game he bought for his off-spring doesn't work any more and he will be annoyed enough to show them the finger. Hopefully these silly limitations will come back and bite them in the arse.

  • UKGN_Zoidberg #70 3 years ago

    I think you missed the point of what I said - I haven't registered online at all and don't intend to. Don't see why I should have to? And the game is still enjoyable without registering.

  • FaceOmeter #71 3 years ago

    excellent article, folks. +1 to everything within

  • smelly #72 3 years ago

    @Nithron: No it doesnt. And it wont. But it does make it (piracy) less mainstream.

    If you look back in the past, the most pirated games/software are those without any form of protection at all. If there was no protection to get rid of, mums would be burning off copies of cd's for their friends kids.

    Dont believe me? Well back in the 80's we used to have a cassette tape piracy ring in my school, where parents bought a game, then copied it for all the other kids parents. It was the parents that were doing the piracy.

    Go a bit further into the future - Sim city had no protection on it. Everyone I knew had a copy of it - and no-one bought it.

    etc etc etc.

    It wont stop the pirates, and there will always be ways to get cracks, etc. But the point is - it DOES stop mainstream piracy - by making it harder than "the average joe" can do.

    If the average joe can just burn off a copy of a game for all his mates - he will do. But if he has to download a crack, only to find that his computer now has a virus on it - and he infected all his friends too.. He'll be a little more apprehensive about doing it again in the future.

    See?

    And everything else is just people moaning, and claiming they know someone who knows someone who read on a forum about someone who claims to have a DRM which broke their pc..
    Edited by 1 at 20/10/08 @ 03:39

  • RazorObsession #73 3 years ago

    @ Krun

    +1 for optimism, but i doubt the suits anywhere would ever let it happen.

  • smber2c #74 3 years ago

    I don't get this rediculous idea of "casual piracy" for lending games to friends or selling them on the 2nd hand market. It's MY GAME, if I buy it, I should be able to lend it or sell it. Beside software (who think they should have these special no sell/no lend rules), name me one product I buy that I can't lend or sell as I choose.

    Cars: I buy it, then I can sell it.
    TV: I buy it, I can sell it.
    Books: I buy it, I can sell it.
    Everything works this way; clothes, stocks, houses, jewlery, furniture, gold, DVDs, etc...but software companies want to tell legitimate buyers they can't lend or sell the products they paid for....well BS - that's why I don't buy DRM games. I'd love to play Bioshock, Mass Effect, Spore...but screw them - I won't pay $50 to rent a game.

    And to those thinking 2nd hand sales cripple the industry...think again - do resales cripple sales of DVDs, cars, TVs, computers, houses? No. But many people buy a product knowing they are only doing so b/c they can get part of their investment back on resale. I don't buy console games new, I just won't pay $60. MY friends are the same, but are willing to buy at $60 b/c others like me will buy the game off them for $25 or $35 to they get half their cash back. It isn't anymore piracy than a used car lot.

  • wonton #75 3 years ago

    I remember when I bought Dark Messiah of Might and Magic, loaded with securom, the game refused to acknowledge that I had the disk in the drive, so it kept asking for the disk and I couldn't get the game to run. Bizarrely, if I inserted another random incorrect disk securom would say that it was the wrong disk, wtf?

    So I cracked it. Yup, cracked a legitimately bought game to get it to run. FFS I may as well have bit-torrented it off the internet.

  • avoozl #76 3 years ago

    @smelly

    You make a solid point about why DRM might be required, and maybe if EA made reasonable points instead of spouting their weak PR gibberish they would settle people down some instead of adding fuel to the fire. However those are points for DRM in general and not for SecuROM or other variations of its design. Why anyone would support the use of a sloppy rootkit as part of copy protection is beyond me. I saw you defending it specifically in another thread as well. What exactly has Sony done for you that makes you defend them and turn a blind eye to what they have done in the past? If you don't mind it then fine, but it's highly unreasonable of you to expect that from other people.
    Edited by 2 at 20/10/08 @ 06:39

  • smelly #77 3 years ago

    "And to those thinking 2nd hand sales cripple the industry...think again - do resales cripple sales of DVDs, cars, TVs, computers,"


    Yes... If you bought a brand new car, finished with it in a few days.. sold it back to the garage for a fraction of the cost.. only for them to sell it on again a few pounds cheaper than the brand new price (as opposed to considerable amounts off).

    Gamers dont seem to realise just how much these game stores are taking the piss out of both THEM and the people who make the games...

  • smelly #78 3 years ago

    @avoozl: I'll reply to you when i'm sober enough to formulate a better argument than the one i just made :-)

  • bad09 #79 3 years ago

    "Gamers dont seem to realise just how much these game stores are taking the piss out of both THEM and the people who make the games... "

    What bollocks Smelly, my local small store gives me great trade in price on games and DVD, on many occasion I feel it's ME who's taking the piss! He still knocks money off because I go there all the time, top bloke.

    Stay away from big retail chains and the 2nd hand market (and games buying in general) is a joy.

    Edit - OK that's not fair, Blockbuster are quite reasonable to (although they do take the piss on the newer releases 2nd hand).
    Edited by 1 at 20/10/08 @ 08:21

  • secombe #80 3 years ago

    Are we technically allowed to re-sell our games? I know it's completely accepted, but is it actually legal (and no keyboard lawyers please, facts would be nice)? We usually get a few comments about GAME in this respect, but remember GAME don't accept PC games and haven't for a few years. I assume the second-hand PC market is probably biggest on Ebay.

  • locus2k1 #81 3 years ago

    well said.

  • kangarootoo #82 3 years ago

    @smelly

    "If you make piracy easy - every man and his dog does it (see dreamcast), If you make it harder.. they dont.. see 360/ps3/etc."

    Oh man, did you even read the article. That is honestly the worst post I have ever read from you.

    Comparing one console with another is beyond irrelevant, when the entire point being discussed here is that PC DRM does NOT work, and it does NOT make life hard for pirates.

  • kangarootoo #83 3 years ago

    @smelly

    "where a few pirates start a witch hunt to make their lives easier."

    Oh my god. You are Riccitiello in sock form. Read the article dude. Seriously.


    "I'll reply to you when i'm sober enough to formulate a better argument than the one i just made"

    Ahhhhhhhh, now I understand.

  • kangarootoo #84 3 years ago

    @secombe

    Its actually quite a wooly situation. We are allowed to resell the disc that contains the software, as we own that. But whether the new owner of the disc is entitled to use the software it contains is much hazier (some people always confuse the two; no doubt one of them will post soon :) ).

    I suspect the answer is technically no... but I'm not sure if it has ever been tested in law. I know MS were successful a while back in "asking" to prevent resale of Windows OS discs. Whether that means anything though I don't know. I would suspect if it were ever tested in law it would be settled out of court to avoid setting a precedent.

  • knocker #85 3 years ago

    "Gamers dont seem to realise just how much these game stores are taking the piss out of both THEM and the people who make the games... "

    Quite possibly. But is there anything to stop publishers including the line "we promise to never sell this game second hand" in a contract - or simply refuse to supply shops that undermine their profits so greviously ?

    I've never actually seen a 2nd hand PC game for sale in a high st shop. So the argument falls a bit flat.

    So. It's not really about piracy*, not really about the high st 2nd hand market. So - other than reminding customers who's boss - what does it achieve ?

    I wouldn't dream of installing a pirate game because of the possibility of in coming with added unforeseen unreqested software which may lead to damaging my PC. The same applies to software with DRM added.

    Out of interest - as I've never come across this stuff. Does the option to install the DRM code clearly highlighted to users, hidden away in the T&C's or entirely done by stealth ?

    *agree with low level piracy comment.

    Edited by 1 at 20/10/08 @ 09:28

  • knocker #86 3 years ago

    @kangarootoo

    My understanding too. But it would be a good idea to have this slightly confusing situation clarified in law. Regardless of the strict legal terms, customers view a game as similar to any other piece of media.

    Publishers are happy with this ignorance as gaming goes mainstream, they want to market it as just another piece of media after all. - but I suspect would like to give customers a gentle little reminder about who really owns the data.

    Which is where this DRM fits in I guess.

  • bf #87 3 years ago

    My thoughts exactly. Its a relief to see an article like this on Eurogamer, maybe now this issue can get some mainstream tracktion.
    The idea of including DRM seems to sit in the bones of game company execs. In an interview with GoodOldGames, gog.com, they said that convincing the companies to do away with the "protection" was the hardest part and this is for games that hasnt been on sale for years on end.
    Hopefully the computer games industry can see their way clear through all this silliness. I just hope they wont see Steam, Impulse (Steam wannabe), subscriptions and similar solutions/services as the only viable solution.

  • Eighthours #88 3 years ago

    Nice article, Rob. I totally agree.

  • toy_brain #89 3 years ago

    "Why, exactly, would pirates care about Spore's DRM? If your intention was to pirate the game, there was a perfectly functional copy, totally unencumbered by DRM, sitting up there for you on Bittorrent - for free - on the day of launch. No pirate, with the possible exception of the person who originally uploaded the game to the Internet, ever saw Spore's DRM."

    This one's easy. Pirates care about Spore's DRM not because they have encountered it and been encumbered by it, but because the whole piracy sub-culture (if you can call it that) is one of 'freedom for all' and 'screw the corporate bigwigs'.
    OK so thats little more than a self-justifying face for the real reson of 'I'm too much of an uncaring, selfish cheapskate to pay for anything', but still, given the opportunity to indulge in their rebelliuous fantasy, they will take it and run with it.
    Pirates care about Spore's DRM because they can make-believe that it is so inconvenient it justifies their existance, and they can convert people to their way by telling us that pirateing it is the 'right thing to do'.

    Its the same as people being outraged at some film they haven't actualy seen, most of those outraged by Spore's DRM probably never encounterd it first-hand themselfs.
    Edited by 1 at 20/10/08 @ 10:17

  • karstux #90 3 years ago

    @toy_brain: "Pirates care about Spore's DRM because they can make-believe that it is so inconvenient it justifies their existance, and they can convert people to their way by telling us that pirateing it is the 'right thing to do'. "

    So what you're saying is because Spore's DRM is so intrusive it's easier for the Pirates to justify their behavior because they can feel like they're "sticking it to the man"? I'm not sure I get your point. Surely if DRM makes it easier to justify pirating, it's the very DRM itself that increases piracy - because as proven, on a technical level, it's utterly worthless?

  • secombe #91 3 years ago

    I've never actually seen a 2nd hand PC game for sale in a high st shop. So the argument falls a bit flat.

    I agree (although Gamestation and some indies carry PC games, certainly nothing like the same volumes of console software GAME deal with though), and as mentioned, if pre-owned was really a big issue, the publishers could throw their weight at these stores and probably get shot of it anyway.

    So I really don't get DRM, it's not piracy, and it's very unlikely to be the second-hand market.
    Edited by 1 at 20/10/08 @ 10:29

  • Schiraman #92 3 years ago

    Good article, though some mention of Valve and Stardock wouldn't go amiss.

    It's bizarre to see so many people defending DRM in the comments here. Are they just trying to be contrary, or are they really so easily fooled? I guess maybe all those unskippable ads have had a deep effect on them ;)

  • ruttyboy #93 3 years ago

    "Would you RAPE a child?!

    Would you MURDER an old lady?!

    Because that's the direct equivalent when you pirate a film!"


    Those ads make me laugh :D

    The reason DRM exists is because the people in charge of publishers are not in anyway technically minded. They are 50+ years old and would probably need help installing iTunes on their PC, never mind circumventing it. All they can see are those ludicrous 'loss' calculations that just assume that every download is a lost sale at full retail value. They feel they have to do something to prevent that, but are just not knowledgable enough to understand the fultility of trying.

    Imagine trying to explain 'hacker sub-culture' to your grandma...

  • oxymoron #94 3 years ago

    Far Cry 2 is available now on the torrent me hearties, aaarrrr!

  • JonFE #95 3 years ago

    One more thing. Given the market penetration of high-speed internet connections and torrents, is it possible that this casual piracy is more or less doomed anyway, as average Joe will eventually find it easier to download instead?

  • IronCladChicken #96 3 years ago

    @knightmt
    Ocean tried usnig a dongle for RoboCop3 back in the early ninties - A craked version was available for the games offical release and Ocean lost a shit load of money having to supply a dongle in every box.

  • Silvervein #97 3 years ago

    @smelly
    Just to add more facts to your list of examples of how lack of drm increases piracy, I'd like to remind you of Galactic Civilizations 1 and 2. Games that are devoid of any DRM, and yet, shockingly, were not pirated in a degree even nearing that of spore. Apparently, a 'thank you for purchasing original' card inside dvd box or adding meaningful free content for legitimate users of the game does more to encourage people to buy the thing in question than threats and warnings of dire consequences. Or plain old spyware.
    Of course, in the time I was following relevant news, the only comment of one of the suits from EA was that 'model used by smaller companies (stardock) will not work for big companies'. He didn't say anything specific, and I apologize for not supplying appropriate link: it was some time ago that I saw that comment and didn't pay it much mind back then.
    Back to the topic: the only reason I can think of why stardock model 'will not work for bigger companies' is that bigger companies are notorious for charging people for extra content. To use most recent example: spore. They charge for both cute and creepy parts expansion (which is, really, quite similar to charging people for horse armour in oblivion, by bethesda), and for the expansion to space age. And mind you. Chargning people *ten bucks* for couple extra parts is *legal*? It's textbook example of *robbery in broad daylight*, only done with blessing of the law. I guess, if they find people who are willing to pay for *that*...heh. However. If they charge for everything extra for the game on top of charging for the game itself, they lose incentive for encouraging people to stick with them. Hence razor wire surrounded camps patrolled by armed guards and rabid dogs, with trumpets blaring: piracy is killing PC gaming, we gots to protect ourselves. While in reality it's just nothing more than naked greed of company that's after profit at any cost. Anyone, and any company has to ask itself at one point when enough is enough. If you set your boundary where stardock did, you generate goodwill of your customers, and that is most effective deterrent of pirating their games. Treat your customers as your slaves that must do as you tell them or else, the way EA does, and you get piracy problems.

    PS.
    And I wholeheartedly agree that the whole DRM debacle is much more effective in eliminating second hand pc game market than it is at eliminating piracy. While its effects on preventing piracy are negligible, it does kill second hand market, and does so quite effectively, since if you get any new game from someone, you have to get a crack if you want to play it. Unless it's from another dimension or stardock, where you can use it to your heart content, with no limitations, and registration is needed only if you want extra benefits (which are significant). It's reassuring to think that not everyone on this world is a greedy, lying bastard that has the guts to say that he doesn't like DRM while heading company that uses it on daily basis.
    Edited by 2 at 20/10/08 @ 12:07

  • IronCladChicken #98 3 years ago

    @UKGN_Zoidberg
    The DRM was still installed - You just didn't register (registration is to legally tie you to the contract, it doesnt affect the DRM)

  • toy_brain #99 3 years ago

    "So what you're saying is because Spore's DRM is so intrusive it's easier for the Pirates to justify their behavior because they can feel like they're "sticking it to the man"? I'm not sure I get your point. Surely if DRM makes it easier to justify pirating, it's the very DRM itself that increases piracy - because as proven, on a technical level, it's utterly worthless?"

    Pretty much... well, sort of.
    Its basically a spiralling decent into shitsville. People pirate stuff - companies try to make their stuff harder to pirate - people then get up in arms thinking their civil liberties are being infringed upon* and decide to 'stick it to the man' and pirate more - companies try to take even tougher anti-piracy measures - people get even more pissed off - etc etc etc.
    The DRM itself might not actually be that bad, but if enough people can kick up a fuss about it and convince everyone else - people that havent even tried playing the game - that it's this really huge deal, then they can perpetuate the lie and scare off potential buyers. Buyers that would in reality have had an almost transparent experience with the DRM.

    The obvious answer would be to remove all DRM, treat customers as honest individuals, and just put up with all the fringe piracy that you'll never get rid of anyway. The problem is that nowardays the infastructure for distributing copied games is so vast and well-established (in that most people know where to search to get it - even if the sites themselfs have to keep moving around) that there is no guarantee the piracy would stop if the DRM did, and every chance it could just get worse.
    Right now neither the Hackers/Pirates nor the Publishers are willing to relent, so you basically have a stalemate.

    While DRM might give people more self-justification for pirateing, I think companies are still searching for that Holy Grail of a DRM method that is un-crackable (basically what we have on PSN and XBLA today that has proven to be fully workable). If they reach that goal, then no matter how enraged you are about your civil liberties being infringed upon, if you wanna play, you'll have to pay, and I think most people will end up paying.

    *When I talk about civil liberties I'm using it in the cliched term. I'm pretty sure most of the people who complain about their civil liberties being infringed have no idea what they actually are, and TBH neither do I, but its an easy thing to cry if you are looking for an excuse to be angry.

  • m0thr4 #100 3 years ago

    So glad I was able to download Spore free from Usenet on the day of release. That way, I could see that the game didn't actually appeal to me after all, and I lost no money in the process.

  • subtlesnake #101 3 years ago

    "It's bizarre to see so many people defending DRM in the comments here. Are they just trying to be contrary, or are they really so easily fooled? I guess maybe all those unskippable ads have had a deep effect on them ;)"

    By defending DRM presumably you mean: indicating that it's a factor in reducing casual piracy, and so (depending on the make-up of pirates) may actually make a significant difference. I don't see what's wrong with that line of argument, given that nobody, in this article or in this comment section has quantified the impact of casual piracy (or its 'preventability').
    Edited by 1 at 20/10/08 @ 12:44

  • Nithron #102 3 years ago

    @toy_brain: Everything you say is true, but it's worth noting that there will never be a form of DRM on PC that is uncrackable. If you can run it, you can crack it. The only possible way to ever implement an "uncrackable" DRM scheme would be to completely lock down the PC as a platform, which would basically prevent it from being a PC. I should imagine, that were that ever to occur, the PC would re-emerge based on another standard because there will always be a market for a cheap, open platform.

    It's also worth noting that even on totally locked down platforms - consoles, that is - you can still crack it by modifying the hardware.

    The fact that it is totally impossible to completely prevent piracy means that the best option is probably to, as you mentioned, treat customers as honest people, treat their relationship with your company as a mutually beneficial business arrangement, and drop the DRM.

    Stardock did this. And it's worked for them.

    @smelly: You're quite right, it does prevent casual piracy. However, just plain CD checks prevented casual piracy. Adding online checks - like on Steam - was pretty dodgy, but still reasonably justifiable. Now, however, we are getting games with activation limits, where if you reinstall it too many times, or update your computer too many times, suddenly you don't own the game any more.
    That doesn't work any better to prevent casual piracy, it's really just a step too far.
    Edited by 1 at 20/10/08 @ 13:33

  • toy_brain #103 3 years ago

    "@toy_brain: Everything you say is true, but it's worth noting that there will never be a form of DRM on PC that is uncrackable. If you can run it, you can crack it. The only possible way to ever implement an "uncrackable" DRM scheme would be to completely lock down the PC as a platform, which would basically prevent it from being a PC. I should imagine, that were that ever to occur, the PC would re-emerge based on another standard because there will always be a market for a cheap, open platform."

    Heh, I was actually going to say something similar. I even typed it out a couple times but deleted it in case someone thought it was anti-PC trolling. Yes the nature of PC gaming, and PC gaming culture itself seems to dictate that any means of 'locking down' their experience would be met with the maximum amout of fire and pitchfork-waving that any nerd could muster. For console gamers its just part of the package, but for PC gamers having everything free and open is a cornerstone of their culture and any attempt to do this would be met with very heavy resistance.

    "It's also worth noting that even on totally locked down platforms - consoles, that is - you can still crack it by modifying the hardware."

    I've yet to see the likes of Braid, Castle Crashers or Wipeout HD up for download on any torrent site, which suggests that (for now at least) the 360 and PS3's DRM for downloadable games remains unbroken.
    Interesting then, that while PC piracy has suffered massively due to the internet and high-speed broadband, its actually been an integral part of keeping games consoles secure.
    Edited by 1 at 20/10/08 @ 13:50

  • Les #104 3 years ago

    "Media companies can whinge and moan about pirates until the cows come home, but the simple reality is that while your paid-for version of a product is less functional and more annoying than the free pirate version, you're driving your customers into the welcoming arms of Bittorrent."

    + a lot.

    Though I think pirates are wrong, ignorant and selfish. What I object to is crippling paid-for products.
    Edited by 1 at 20/10/08 @ 15:41

  • neems #105 3 years ago

    It is worth noting that Pirate copies of games, on the whole, STILL CONTAIN DRM. Pirates are not in the habit of entirely recoding games in order to remove copy protection. This is why you need a crack to play them. If you have a pirate copy of Spore, you will still have SecuRom on your system.

    If you wish to support the industry, but find the DRM on a given game to be intrusive, buy it, and then use a crack. If you do not wish to have the offending DRM on your pc at all - then avoid the game altogether.

    As an employee of M&S, I also feel honour bound to point that we do not, in fact, put tags on our underpants - or indeed on anything else (in our branch at least). We do of course have security guards and CCTV. And razor wire.

  • ruttyboy #106 3 years ago

    And middle class values.

  • neems #107 3 years ago

    "And middle class values."

    But at lower class prices!

    This is not just a DRM thread - this is a 'Your M&S' DRM Thread.

  • SunoffaBeach #108 3 years ago

    pleese explain this to me:

    DRM is shit for gamers.
    DRM is shit for publishers.
    DRM increases piracy.
    DRM in music industry -> epic fail

    why then does EA use pay for DRM?

    i try really hard but i dont get it.
    pleese explain.


  • karstux #109 3 years ago

    @neems:

    Sorry, but your proposal is defective on two levels:

    1. Buying the game signals the publisher that customers accept the chosen DRM scheme. Unless you vote with your wallet and NOT BUY, nothing will change and the DRM will become ever more oppressive.

    2. Using a crack is illegal under most jurisdictions. I don't know about the UK, but it certainly is in Germany and the USA. Also, cracks can contain all sorts of malware. I'd rather not use them. I'd much rather have an acceptable copy protection that doesn't infringe on my rights and freedoms - like cd-checks and serials.

  • smber2c #110 3 years ago

    Smelly: "Yes... If you bought a brand new car, finished with it in a few days.. sold it back to the garage for a fraction of the cost.. only for them to sell it on again a few pounds cheaper than the brand new price (as opposed to considerable amounts off).
    Gamers dont seem to realise just how much these game stores are taking the piss out of both THEM and the people who make the games... "

    But see that's the publishers problem for making a game that's so quickly consumed, giving original buyers little in terms of extras, and apparently having no replay value. After 2 days the game has zero worh to owners thus leading them to accept a fraction the cost in return for their game. I've got tons of DVDs and games I'd never sell b/c they are/were too good. Warcraft/Starcraft/Diablo games, Fallouts, Torment, Total War, Civilizations, Half-Life, Deus Ex, some college/pro football games, certain Zelda/Metroid/Mario/kart/brawl games, etc.. I could make a list of the DVD I wouldn't part with 5 times as long.

    If I bought a set of speakers for my computer...2 days later thought "wow these suck", how am I justified in putting them on Ebay but somehow the same action with a game is casual piracy?

    And just because houses or cars are larger and longer term investments doesn't change the fundamental of this argument that you've not refuted. It's mine, I bought it, why am I evil if I sell it?

    I don't know european laws, but in the US there are "rights of first sale" that allow a person purchasing a product the rights to make personal copies, give the product (including all copies) to another person, or sell the product (including all copies) to another. Basically saying, if you buy something (a home, a car, music, movies, or games) it is yours and you can do what you want with it.

    We have 11 circuit courts here, and only 2 are currently leaning toward allowing this idea that consumers are only buying a license; everywhere else they are calling the EULA's (that say "oh you thought you bought this in the store, but really it's a rental that we dictate what you can do with and for how long";) unenforcable because they break first sale law.

    So, people arguing that players agreed to it in the EULA to a license to play the game and not that you actually own the game....we that's not true in some places. Some countries have made that illegal and the consumer does actually own 1 copy of the game, that by law they can lend or sell as they see fit.

    'Casual piracy' is a farce and mearly wants to milk every cent out of a game it can, using means that we would never allow in any other industry. Thankfully some courts are calling this illegal and thus I hope legal action will soon be brought that keeps them from including the language and instruments that maintain this misunderstanding.

    And as to game stores cheating gamers...don't sell the them. E-bay and a hundrend other sites exist to go straight from consumer to consumer. Both users get a good deal.

  • neems #111 3 years ago

    @Karstux -

    I was simply trying to point out that Pirates do not get a magical DRM free copy of 'the game'.

    Not buying the game is unlikely to change how EA and others act unless it happens en mass, which at the current time seems unlikely as most people neither know nor care much about DRM. It also has a serious drawback in that you don't get to play the game (obviously).

    You are of course correct that a non-intrusive copy protection would be much better - although even cd-checks can have their problems. Colin Mcrae Dirt has increased performance with a no-dvd crack (primarily related to stuttering caused by the periodic disc check). Assassin's Creed constantly locks up for several seconds at a time if my internet connection is not active - this is solved by using a no-dvd crack. On my old system I had to use a crack for Stalker as SecuRom conflicted with my DVD drive (works fine on my current rig).

    In the absence of acceptable copy protection on various games, we are left with three choices - don't play the game, put up with the DRM, or circumvent it. You pays your money, you takes your choice (or not, as the case may be).

    Cracks for games may be illegal, but they are unlikely to cause much furore. Given the option, would EA rather I bought their game and cracked it, or pirated it and cracked it?




  • karstux #112 3 years ago

    "I was simply trying to point out that Pirates do not get a magical DRM free copy of 'the game'. "

    But they do! Maybe a cracked, perverted husk of the DRM software is still shipped with the pirate version, but it no longer serves its original function. It doesn't "manage" the "rights" of the copyright owner, but gives free access to the game. It may still have unpleasant side-effects on the system it runs on, but that's another matter entirely.

    Everyone seems to think that consumer protests and boycotts never amount to anything. I don't think that's true. Voting with your wallet and protesting loudly do work! Just look at the much-hated StarForce copy protection. It was communally hated, and now it's gone, even though it didn't get nearly as much media attention as SecuROM currently does. The same can happen to SecuROM.

  • Lawlost #113 3 years ago

    Sorry late to the party again some people were asking whether you can legally sell your games once you have finished with them. The answer is no you probably cannot. There is no definitive answer as it is dependent on how the game is licensed. When you purchase a game you are buying a) the physical product, disc case and instructions and b) a license to use that game. It is the terms of the licence that decides whether you can re-sell the game. I have has a quick look at a few of my games and most but not all state the license granted is 'non-transferable' therefore I cannot sell it on without their permission. There is a question as to whether all terms of these licences are enforceable as you need to buy the game, break the seal (making it non returnable) before you discover the terms of the license, as such it is arguable that the these terms were not incorporated into the contract.

    In reality though no publishers have tried to enforce the non-tranferable provision against individuals, it is far too difficult for them to police. It may be that they turn to the retailers to try and prevent them reselling, however, there is a reluctance to do so as a lot of gamer sell on to be able to buy their next game. If publishers prevented retailers selling used games fewer games overall would be sold.
    Edited by 2 at 20/10/08 @ 20:54

  • neems #114 3 years ago

    They really don't Karstux. Pirate copies have the exact same copy protection as genuine copies - it's the crack that makes the difference, and you can use the crack on retail games. Back in the starforce days, some of the pirate copies made you disconnect your optical drives before you could play - because starforce was still in operation, regardless of the source of the game. The number of times I've seen people on forums say that they will download 'insert game here' because they object to having SecuRom on their computer - not realising that they are still installing it.



  • ByteShield #115 3 years ago

    "Only customers hate DRM, pirates remove it" - this is how one developer summed up the current state of software protection from piracy. In summary, the current state of anti-piracy in the PC game industry is:

    1. Many continue to debate whether piracy of digital content equals lost sales but the real question to ask is how much of piracy would turn into sales if piracy were prevented. Given piracy rates for certain games and software, the proportion does not need to be large before the impact is significant to publishers and developers. For example, describing the PC game market as "the most intensely pirated market ever," Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli's assessment is,"for one sale there are 15 to 20 pirates and pirate versions." AutoDesk has publicly stated similar numbers for AutoCAD. If only 1 of every 10 illegal copies turn into sales, revenues would double.

    2. DRM has reduced some types of illegal copying but has largely failed to protect vendors' legitimate rights because they are rapidly cracked. If it is extremely easy to circumvent the protection, many amateurs will do it. If the protection is more challenging, some people will not be able to get around the DRM and some of these will actually purchase the game/software, rather than find it on a torrent site. While virtually all DRM solutions have been cracked, the piracy problem may well have been even larger if all games/software had been distributed unprotected.

    3. DRM has contributed to destroyed customer relationships and trust by impinging, inconveniencing and even impugning honest customers.

    4. Annoyed and hostile gamers publicly vent their outrage and fury on game suppliers and DRM suppliers via portals, blogs and message boards.

    5. Impacting honest users tends to shift their sympathy towards the pirates rather than the developers and publishers. In effect, onerous DRM legitimizes piracy - because with pirated copies you avoid the hassles DRM imposes. We have heard of honest users using a cracked version because it is easier to run but purchasing a legitimate copy that is kept unopened in order to be an 'honest' user.

    The answer is: End users should be able to install the game/software on an unlimited number of computers and keep on adding installations, as hardware changes or system crashes etc. occur. The real item to control is not the number of installations; it is how many of these installations can be used, at the same time.

    Above are excerpts from the whitepaper <a href=http://www.byteshield.net/byteshield_whitepaper_0005.pdf >”Is Anti-Piracy/DRM the Cure or the Disease for PC Games?"</a>.

    Christian Olsson
    ByteShield, Inc.

  • toy_brain #116 3 years ago

    "Media companies can whinge and moan about pirates until the cows come home, but the simple reality is that while your paid-for version of a product is less functional and more annoying than the free pirate version, you're driving your customers into the welcoming arms of Bittorrent."

    Thanks to Les for highlighting this one for me.
    While it may be true that a legaly bought DRM-filled game might provide some annoyance, grabbing the pirate version is also not without its problems. Sometimes they can be a sod to get working themselfs- either needing to be mounted on a virtual CD/DVD drive, requiring some archaicly-written hack to be applied, or they could just be a dump of the CD/DVD image - completely useless to anyone without the keycode on the manual.
    Or they could contain viruses, trojans and other malware - not a huge deal for any savvy PC gamer with an up-to-date antivirus program installed, but still a huge annoyance to have downloaded over a gig of data only to find it's a useless pile of virus-infected crap.

    No, not all pirated versions of games are that bad, and no, I don't have that much experience anyway (a couple really old PC point-n-click adventures is about the extent of it, seeings as my rig isn't up to much else), I just wanted to point out that its far from hassle-free, and bittorrents arms are not as welcoming as they might first appear.
    None of this is me being Pro excessive-DRM, but i think its worth considering the full picture. Its not quite as black-and-white as 'Legal with DRM bad, Pirated good'

  • Silvervein #117 3 years ago

    @toy_brain
    You fail to mention one difference between legal malware (DRM) and pirated copy. For the first one, you pay good cash and what you get is veiled rental rights, with possible hardware problems you would have to sort out yourself: or pay equivalent, or more, of game price in phone bills if you decide to call customer support that will aggravate you for days with usless advice.
    If you get pirated version, you don't pay a dime, other than internet bill. On top of that, you can usually get a feeling about whatever you want to download the file, if only by looking at relevant comments. Also, you can be sure that pirated version offers you what was offered legally couple of years back: ownership of the game, meaning unrestricted access to it, any time you want, and any number of times you want. And that's what makes pirated copies 'good', understood as 'user friendly'. Myself, I never had any virus problems with cracked versions either.

    Keep in mind, I'm not endorsing piracy. Strangely enough, neither do pirates themselves, since in the info files for pirated games you can always see the line: if you like the game, buy it. Which is what honest people do, but it's only partial solution. You do support the developer, and get user friendly pirated version, but that doesn't send the message to the publisher that their protection is not protecting anything and is in fact turning legitimate customers away. It tells them that people buy their game no matter what 'protection' they put there, so they put even more protection on the next game in their chase after profits.
    Claims that not buying games sends no message to relevant people is naive. Number of people tired with current copy protection scam is very large, if those forums are any indication. Large enough for EA to back off a bit during DRM mass effect problem. The voice of people voting with their wallets and on the forums *is* heard.

    @byteshield

    I'll reply to you in points also, each one corresponding to the point from your post.

    1. At the end of that point you say that piracy is the cause of poor sales, and eliminating it would increase revenue of publishers significantly, even if small number of people got the official version. Well and good. But where does the assumption that anyone would get legal version, should cracked one were not available, comes from? Also, piracy became very useful excuse for poor sales. One can say it's even abused. Case in point: crysis. Boring game with insane requirements, needed for insiginicant gameplay improvement with most of elements not that different from first game in genre: wolfstein. And unfinished at that, since alien levels were poorly designed and simply boring. It's very easy to blame poor sales on piracy, instead of poor workmanship.

    2. I'm not sure if I understand your argument here. Are you saying that intrusive DRM is justified because it reduces piracy? That issue was discussed on this thread already, but I'll just say that with easy internet access, virtually anyone can access pirated games or programs regardless of their programming skill. You don't need the knowledge how to bypass DRM yourself in order to get a appropriate crack from the internet. And a point of interest: Galactic civilization 1 and 2 were released *without* any DRM whatsoever, and yet were pirated in much smaller degree than, say, spore. That's because the only working copy protection system is not technical, but ethical. No technology is 100% safe, even mmo's can be pirated and played on pirate servers. But if your customers respect your company, it's a mutually beneficial arrangement. I would like to refer you to stardock company.

    3. No comment here, it's true.

    4. No comment here either, it's certainly true.

    5. Largely true, but not in every case. Some people just won't buy the game with intrusive DRM, and they won't get pirated version of it either.

    As for your conclusion in 'the answer' Any control of publisher over property of people who bought it is going to meet with huge amount of dissatisfaction. Whether it's amount of times one can install the game, or how many instances of said game can he run, or how long can he own the game. All those are legal means of robbing legitimate customer of his property. If company intends only to *lend* their product (game) they are free to do so, but in that case I expect proper price tag: not exceeding 5 dollars or about 2.2 quid. If they *sell* the product (game), their influence over it ends at the moment when they receive money for it. End of story.

  • Gel214th #118 3 years ago

    Another issue tied to DRM is Digital Distribution.

    I have a friend who does not live in the US, but she wants to get these games the day of release. Big titles, like Far Cry 2, Dead Space etc. She has the credit card, She certainly has the money..She WANTS to purchase.

    But She can't.

    These games are limited to the US only, sometimes US and Canada only.

    She pays almost 3 times as much for the game at local retail, and have to wait a month or more in some cases.

    Again, She WANTS to pay. She would rather stand a long download, and the inconvenience of multiple installs (I believe she still has a Vista/ WIndows XP Dual Boot machine) than waiting a month and paying double or triple the cost.

    There are just 300 million people in the US. There are over a billion English Speaking people in the rest of the world. Why cut that market out of Digital Distribution? Because of 'licensing' ?? What licensing?? If someone wants the physical product they can wait and purchase it in a store, if I am willing to forego that then isn't that a choice they make?

    What do you think a human being does? Yeah. They'll get the game off of Torrents. Especially if they are an enthusiast gamer that wants it NOW (perfect customer btw).

    Why don't companies fix Digital Distribution so there is simultaneous WORLDWIDE release and availability?? Instead of focusing on 200 million people, why not focus on 2 billion?
    Edited by 1 at 20/10/08 @ 23:38

  • BonzoBanana #119 3 years ago

    I haven't bought a pc game for about 5 years now although I have about 3 pcs and love games. I like games to be quick to load, convenient and hassle free and thats not pc gaming for me. For me pc gaming is long installs, compatibility and configuration issues and of course software protection meaning I have to have the cd/dvd in the drive when I play it. I just can't be bothered to be honest. I prefer console gaming nowadays. Much more convenient. Although all my console games are original I must admit I tend to use only pirate pc games and thats only rarely as I don't tend to play pc games much.

  • bf #120 3 years ago

    @ByteShield
    I suppose you just by pure coincidence happen to sell a product that as by magic cures all those ails. There is a short pier somewhere that needs a long walk, why dont you go fix that.

    @Nithron
    Yes and no. Stardock are certainly getting a lot of praise for being DRM free but when you look at how SDC and Impulse works they are just like Steam and others that require online activation and offer you no possibility to sell your game second hand which is, even though very lenient, DRM.

    The story only lasted a full day on the front page, I'm somewhat disapointed.
    Edited by 1 at 21/10/08 @ 06:12

  • Ryuken #121 3 years ago

    "Yes and no. Stardock are certainly getting a lot of praise for being DRM free but when you look at how SDC and Impulse works they are just like Steam and others that require online activation and offer you no possibility to sell your game second hand which is, even though very lenient, DRM. "

    SDC and Impulse don't work exactly like Steam's Valve games; you're never required to activate a Stardock game during installation just to be able to start it. You can play GalCiv II and Sins of a Solar Empire perfectly fine on an offline PC right from the get-go, unlike Valve's stuff (and any other current PC game for that matter...). Of course, if you want the updates/patches then you need to connect online but that's not DRM since the standard retail versions aren't crippled or riddled with bugs, I even think it's possible to transfer those patch files from one PC to another while only one has to be connected.

    Btw, every PC game with an online component which uses accounts (whether to get updates or to use multiplayer servers and such) can't be resold 'officially' but people are always free to sell their game and their account info with it somewhere else, as they have always done. It's not any different from the console second-hand market, you only need to be sure it is sold with all the info a new player needs of course. The reason publishers don't allow for second-hand stuff isn't only because it would cannibalise new sales but because it's a burden on support (just like pirated versions are btw). If people don't get all the information (manuals, account info, links) then that's just asking for trouble.

    The story only lasted a full day on the front page, I'm somewhat disapointed.

    Well, it's just kicking in an open door, it will be forgotten by other site editors and publishers just like any of our comments here. Writing editorials and putting DRM in the news won't prevent publishers to keep on restricting honest PC users, Rob Fahey has formulated a nice stance on the subject here but Eurogamer as a whole and the rest of the media haven't. They're afraid or don't want to dig deeper and confront the ones responsible for the current issues, in general; they care just as much about PC gaming as EA, Ubisoft and the others. The media has to do more.

  • bf #122 3 years ago

    "SDC and Impulse don't work exactly like Steam's Valve games; you're never required to activate a Stardock game during installation just to be able to start it."
    The ones that I've bought from them does.
    Edited by 1 at 22/10/08 @ 11:42

  • Ryuken #123 3 years ago

    Well, the ones I bought from them at retail didn't.

  • Dogstar060763 #124 3 years ago

    I agree in general with the article - DRM is a perversion in that it effectively 'punishes' legitimate customers and completely misses it's intended targets (the pirates). But the case put forward that it is always easier and hassle-free to obtain a torrented copy of a new game is not entirely true. One look at any popular torrent site's games listings will reveal - almost always - a catalogue of complaints, moans and whines from downloaders who can't get the games to run for one reason or another. I know: the irony is huge - here you have thieves complaining to their pimp that he hasn't cracked the game properly; these guys actually feel hard done by!

    It's a difficult situation for all concerned - the publishers, devs and customers. At the moment (and if the games work) the pirates and their downloaders seem to be getting the best 'deal'. Publishers need to value their paying customers far more - they need to show respect and encourage a welcoming sense of 'inclusion' for those who are prepared to lay out often fairly large sums of money on a new game purchase. If we, as those paying customers, feel valued we develop a sense of real loyalty towards certain developers because we understand the value of their work and the importance of genuine financial remuneration for the good of the games we enjoy so much.

    Publishers should stop worrying about the pirates - it's a battle they will never win. Time to focus 100% on the paying public and how to develop a meaningful (and profitable) relationship with them.