Stopping pirates is an acceptable goal, but what they are doing is NOT working. They're not stopping pirates for even a few hours. Spore for example, was cracked a week before release. Obtaining a cracked copy with ultra-uber DRM is as easy now as obtaining a cracked copy that uses a simple key registration. Even USB dongle type applications can be cracked.

Quote: Original post by frob
The only model that has proven successful is to require an online connection to play.

How has it proven itself successful? Games that require an online connection to play are still cracked, usually the same day they're released. No model is completely successful and when the legitimate customers are penalized that model needs to go back to the drawing board.

Quote: Original post by SimonForsman
The point is that even with DRM everyone can download a fully functioning version of the game almost at day one without any drawbacks

There are different groups of people, willing to do different things to pirate the game. I'm just guessing, but I think there is a significant group that would copy their friends' CDs, but that won't download a cracked version. For one thing, people that download the cracked versions (unless they really know their computers), usually have their PCs full of viruses and spyware. Even if there are 10% paying customers, 89% downloaders, and 1% that would copy the CD but not download it, it's probably worth it.

Okay, there have been a few people throwing around statistics in this thread, but I'm not seeing much for support of the numbers.

People say that 90% of games played are pirated. Okay, how many of those people would have bought the game if they couldn't pirate it? 90% is a worthless number without some sort of control, as there are so many factors as to why people pirate, including (In a roughly estimated order or importance):

People don't want the game enough to buy it due to a middling interest, lack of funds or lack of effort.

"Why spend money when I can get it for free?"

Staggered release dates/long 'street date' waits mean that the pirated version gets to market quicker.

The game is out of print or otherwise unavailable in the customers region.

People don't like the DRM, or are scared of it because of bad experiences/stories.

People have no intention of playing the game, they're just collectors and/or use them for trading with other people.

People refuse to buy games from a particular publisher/developer on moral grounds but want to play the game anyway.

People want to know what the game is like/whether or not it will run on their PC before buying it (And there's no adequate demo available).

People aren't aware that downloading it is 'wrong' (I imagine there are very, very few people out there today that actually think this rather than just saying it).

That's a hell of a lot of reasons right there. The thing is, DRM doesn't turn many of these reasons into actual sales. The 90% numbers that publishers use to justify their draconian DRM methods are useless, because those numbers only works if the DRM actually holds, and as we've seen, they almost never do. Plus, we have no control numbers, so it could stand to reason that well over half of those people wouldn't have played the game at all if it wasn't free. We just don't know.

So what is DRM stopping, exactly? Due to the way the internet is at the moment, all it takes is a single person to crack and distribute it, and then suddenly it's available to everybody. Most are cracked in under a day, some in a week and a very rare few in a month or more. DRM isn't even good at keeping honest people honest, because most of the time the DRM isn't an obstacle at all. If you download a game from a torrent, it's pre-cracked, so you never even hit the DRM bump at all. Only paying, honest customers do.

It's like chaining up your bike to a twig in a dark alley. Once that twig is broken, people can ride your bike all they like, and the lock didn't do shit.

The only copy protection that has been proven without a doubt to work is content. WoW constantly updates their game, runs specific challenges and basically keeps their game alive, which is something you wouldn't get on a pirate server (I don't think, I don't play it myself). Valve integrates meaningful updates with their games, also including a no-fuss way to buy games worldwide the second they're released. The publishers offer something that the pirates can't provide; up-to-date content. That's by far the best solution.

[Edited by - PlayfulPuppy on March 10, 2010 11:28:58 AM]

Quote: Original post by frob

Quote: Original post by Moe
There have been plenty of 'studies' or at least estimates that try to guess how much money is lost due to piracy. Has anyone ever done a study to see how much money is lost because of retarded DRM systems? How many more customers would have bought these games if they had no DRM? How much did the DRM system cost in the first place? How many developer hours, customer support hours, and quality assurance hours were burned through when adding the DRM?

Yes, publishers do that kind of tests.

I think you misunderstood me. I mean, instead of doing a study on how much piracy costs us, how about doing a study on how much DRM costs a studio to include in a game?

I'm all for SaaS. The thing is with that though, is that the product should continue to function, even if the publisher goes belly up. I have no problems with a game like Assassin's Creed 2 doing periodic check-ups against Ubisoft's service, so long as the game continues to function when it is unable to do so. Suppose I grab my laptop and head out on the road for a little holiday. My game shouldn't stop working just because I can't get a wi-fi connection - especially for a single player game!

I understand the need to protect software. We all can't put food on our table if people don't buy our software. That said, we should be providing some sort of better alternative - like SaaS enhancements (Xbox Live anyone?) instead of punishing people that have legitimately purchased the game and are unable to 'call home'. Take World of Warcraft as an example - it's the perfect example of Software as a Service. They are continually providing new content to keep people happy (people who have legitimately paid). Yes, there are cracked servers out there (or so I've been told), but they don't offer nearly the same benefits of the legitimate ones. Again, Steam seems to follow this same model - give the legitimate buyers some form of advantage over the non-legitimate ones (like being able to associate games to an account, not games to a machine. Switching machines? That's fine - all your games will follow you).

I'd be interested in hearing piracy rates for a massive blockbuster like Modern Warfare 2. It seems to have done quite well, despite all this talk about piracy. Kudos to Bioware not having anything more than a CD check. They probably saved a bundle on support and licenses on DRM software.

Quote: Original post by BLiTZWiNG
I blame the internet.

Even casual piracy is increased by simple publishing of knowledge of how to break copy protection.

It may be part of the problem, but it also looks like part of the solution.

Quote: Original post by Machaira

Quote: Original post by frob
The only model that has proven successful is to require an online connection to play.

How has it proven itself successful? Games that require an online connection to play are still cracked, usually the same day they're released. No model is completely successful and when the legitimate customers are penalized that model needs to go back to the drawing board.

Let me be more precise.

Not having an online connection to start the game. Not having an online connection that is periodically checked for existence.

I mean having an online connection because content must flow over the wire.
* MMOs where you must pay a subscription to get access.
* Network games were you pay once, and the company controls the servers and can verify disc keys against those actually printed, and verify them against multiple users.
* Games where the basic content is on disc, but the best stuff is free DLC that requires evidence of purchase.
* Games where the basic content is on disc, the best stuff is streamed in as you play.

These have shown to be the effective models so far.

Quote: Original post by frob
In order to get the tens of millions of dollars needed to develop and publish a game, we need those sales.

Well, tell you what, we as consumers don't care about your profit margin. We care about a nice thing called end user experience. Most multinational consumer goods companies spend more on research to improve end user experience annually than the budget you use for tens games. And guess what ? It pays off to not rape your customer. Because even though consumers are sheep, if you treat them like shit too much, they will flock over to the competition. And in your case, that competition are the pirates. And their offer is very, very interesting for a consumer once the ethical threshold of pirating a game is exceeded by the annoyance factor caused by your product.

Piracy is an inevitable fact of PC gaming. It is an integral part of the business of developing PC games, and it has to be included in your business plan and financial forecasts. And if the only way for you to create PC games without financial losses is to treat every paying customer as a criminal, then you should maybe consider stop developing PC games.

There should be more action class lawsuits against developers using abusive DRM that damages your computer or exposes it to risks (the shell extension crashing Windows that someone mentioned above, or the Sony rootkit, for example). Publishers would think twice about adding such DRM, if they had to pay millions in damages every time something went wrong.

Quote: Original post by frob
Yes, it has happened in the past. Remember World of Goo? It had no copy protection, and telemetry showed well over 90% piracy.

90% of what? People playing? What does that number have to do with sales, revenues, and jobs? After all, there's nothing to indicate that if piracy had been impossible, all those pirated copies would have been sales instead.

Given that, why is (sold copies)/(pirated copies) a metric that anyone even bothers to use? It has absolutely zero relevance for how much revenue the game generates. It's as if business representatives just use that sort of statistic to convince themselves that pirates are worth focusing on, while in reality, it's probably a lot better to only have lightweight DRM and instead focusing on providing a good product. There are, after all, examples that demonstrate that lack of DRM can still lead to very successful games. Stardock is one publisher that has provided several shining examples.

Quote: Original post by nullsquared
Related: img src="http://i.imgur.com/GxzeV.jpg"

I think the idea is that all the formalities at the beginning are there to give you time to pop the popcorn, visit the loo, read the newspaper, pet the dog, and get settled in your comfy chair before the movie begins...

Quote: Original post by Hnefi

Quote: Original post by frob
Yes, it has happened in the past. Remember World of Goo? It had no copy protection, and telemetry showed well over 90% piracy.

90% of what?

The 90% figure was based on number of copies sold vs. number of unique IPs recorded.

What throws the figure off a bit is the number of people with multiple unique IPs due to DSL or dialup.