Whether piracy is right or wrong really has nothing to do with a developer... it happens. If it happens to a large enough extent, you don''t make money. And for most companies, not making money means you can''t make any more games... simple as that.

That being said, I think the original post poses the question ''How much protection is too much?'', or at what point does the protection actually detract from the game?

I think this is a valid point - look at the music industry now by comparison. One of the hottest things in music in recent years is MP3. I love being able to store my music collection on my PC and play it whenever I want; download it to my Cassiopeia or MP3 player, etc (BTW, these are rips of CD''s I actually own). New copy protection aims to prevent this - some actually affects whether a CD will even play on a PC. I think that''s unacceptable - If I pay for the CD, I should be able to use it in whatever way I''d like that is within Fair Use.

Inserting a CD to play a game is not too much of an inconvenience (although, CD''s being prone to scratches if mishandled, they are safer in the CD case). But how about having to call to get software unlocked just because you made upgrades to your PC? (Before everyone fusses, I know that this only happens under certain circumstances, and in general is not that big a problem - at least so far) But where will this trend end? Will I have to be connected to the internet to verify my CD Key evertime I play the game? I have a modem connection (No broadband in the forseeable future) and having to connect defeats the purpose of playing on offline game. For that matter, what if your PC doesn''t have an internet connection? (Perhaps a laptop while on the road?) Those are the types of questions that I believe the original post raises - how far is too far? Is the measure of a protection schemes viability based solely on it''s ability to prevent copying? How can protection be implemented to prevent theft while still allowing full use for the user?

Is there anyone here who don''t program for money? Does Open Source software ring any bell in here? is copyright legitimate? Why everybody want to protect knowledge? Knowledge belond to the poeple and it should be free. What''s the point of doing a game? You want people to enjoy them! Here we have a discussion "a la napster", im a musician and i don''t care if people d/l mp3 of my work, cause i just want people to enjoy what i''m doing, game industry should be the same

but the best protection is to do a game like diablo 2 of half life, where the point of the game is to play online and that there is a cd key check when you log on the server.

do you think Robin Hood is a bad guy? well Pirate are the new Robin Hood of our time, they steal from the rich to give to the poor. Knowledge and fun souldn''t be stopped by a lack of money.




Who''''s your daddy? I''''m Your daddy! Cause i do this to you'''' mama!

Copyrights protects your work not the ideas.

You pay to get something.
You''re free not to buy a product if you don''t want it.

In case you didn''t notice we are working to get money, if as you say our work is not worth money then nobody would have a job...

rather stupid thought.


If you don''t know that you shouldn''t give input in the thread at all.


-* So many things to do, so little time to spend. *-

quote: Original post by deadmilkman
do you think Robin Hood is a bad guy? well Pirate are the new Robin Hood of our time, they steal from the rich to give to the poor. Knowledge and fun souldn't be stopped by a lack of money.

Yeah, what on earth are the game developers thinking? Greedy bastards, working 16 hour days seven days a week to produce something for our enjoyment, and then expecting to get paid for it?

No pirates are NOT the good guys, and please don't post any more retarded flamebait bullshit in this thread.

quote: Original post by iQ
That being said, I think the original post poses the question 'How much protection is too much?', or at what point does the protection actually detract from the game?

I think the value of *any* copy protection is somewhat debatable. Granted, basic copy protection gets rid of your casual copiers which are probably your main target, but even then, is it such a big deal? The sales results for Serious Sam as quoted in the article I linked to earlier are quite interesting. This game had no copy protection whatsoever.

What I really wanted to do was point this out to anyone who cares. A quality game at a sensible price will sell well. A mediocre game at a high price will get copied. Amazing copy protection might boost your sales for that game, but it won't fix the publics general feeling of being ripped off and dissatisfaction with the industry in general. And if they feel like the industry is trying to rip them off, they won't have so many qualms about ripping the industry off in return.

[edited by - Sandman on March 27, 2002 12:02:40 PM]

Design considerations wrt copy protection are sorely lacking in this thread. If none are forthcoming, I''ll be forced to move it to the Business of Game Development forum.

[ GDNet Start Here | GDNet Search Tool | GDNet FAQ | MS RTFM [MSDN] | SGI STL Docs | Google! | Asking Smart Questions ]
Thanks to Kylotan for the idea!

Eh, just my rant on the topic...

I definitely believe in copy-protection, but I think that most companies are taking the wrong approach to it.

As far I see, most companies are trying to just make existing anti-piracy schemes harder to crack; this really doesn''t do more then create a delay before the software can be easily pirated. The only software I never see pirated are ones that have a vary strong online aspect (like MMOGs). They vary nature makes them difficult to pirate (because you need to have an account to use the software). I know most people hiss at the idea of "pay-to-play", but it has a certain natural charm (from a developers point of view).

If the actual application was free, and you JUST has to pay for the right to use it then I wouldn''t be any more expensive in the long-run then traditional apps. Plus people copying the software would just doing you a favour (free distribution).

Of course, this is saying that companies don''t go and charge obscene amounts for the right to use their software; and I doubt M$ would pass up the opportunity to push their advantage. But hopefully companies would realize that since they don''t have to spend money on complicated anti-piracy technology, and 100% (or very close) paying-user base they would realize they could charge a lot less per licence.

- Zhypoh!

Well about design of copy protection we saw the good old open the print manual page X, paragrah Y, word Z.

Also there was the DUNE II way : ''We think there''s a traitor, in order to be sure it''s not you, please answer the question :'', the question vary but its answer is easily available in the manual.

I agree that a good price and no copy protection will make a game sell well, no what about basic copy protection (not user unfriendly) + good price ?

Anyone have an idea for a kind of ingame copy protection ?

-* So many things to do, so little time to spend. *-

Subtle methods like those used in Spyro sound most effective - as the article mentions, crackers rarely test their cracks exhaustively, and will consider the game cracked if it appears to work properly.

For game with a strong multiplayer element, perhaps you could require the player to insert an original CD in order to install a patch or update, and use checksums on protected sections of the CD. Although the game itself would run without the CD, it would be very difficult to play online with an unpatched version, and it would be very difficult to patch an illegal copy. Perhaps if the patch installer detects a cracked copy, it might install a slightly dodgy version of the patch, which seems to work but drops connections at random intervals or alters gameplay in such a way as to make winning very difficult, but for that player only.
Of course there is nothing to stop people from simply copying the patched files from one HD to another, but if the amount of data is large enough, this would be a real pain in the neck for pirates to keep their games in sync with the servers. Doubly so if half of them aren''t even aware that their cracked copy is patched with a ''dodgy'' patch.

Ok, we work for money ok, but i think cie are doing enough money no? all the big company that are loosing money with piracy don't need this money. and yes the pirate are the good guys, why? cause like napster piracy let you try the game to see if you like it. look, do i realy want to buy a game that i will play for 10 hours and said "the AI is just too crapy..." and you stop playing the game, well it's a control of quality

and here just for fun for all the one who bitch against piracy, i expect you don't have any mp3 on your computer, cause you just don't make sense, cause those 2 things are the same.

right now everybody dont care about each other and knowledge is given to the ones who got money to pay for it (and im lucky to have money cause i can have education and i can pay 100$can for a programation book (just bought game programming all in one and it's really good)

and if you really like your job, if it at least pay your bills and put bread on your table and you have the satisfaction to have done something great, well that should be the best pay you could ever had...



Who''s your daddy? I''m Your daddy! Cause i do this to you'' mama!

[edited by - deadmilkman on March 27, 2002 2:25:23 PM]

on flame...
trying not to flame but really this is too hard facing a ~#@[{^`~# personn.

Use demos if you want to test the game they are here for that.
Devs get money per title, so maybe the ''big ugly firm'' don''t need this money, but the devs do.
You''re simply telling people that there work is worth nothing, but you still want it ?!

I''ve have MP3 of my CDs it''s perfectly legal.

The internet is fool of informations available for not that much money. Anyway the availability of knowledge to the mass has always been a problem, but you don''t want knowledge you want a product people spend time & energy to make for free, this is called theft.

If people are ready to give me money because they think I deserve it why would have to say no ?
I may choose to say no, but that''s my choice after all.

(And my personnal answer is that I want to be rich to be able to produce my own games without having to care about a publisher and delays)

I think I''ve been pretty clear, if you pirate software, you''re a thief.

*************

On the design issue, I read the Spyro article but it''s more about code than about integrating the copy protection inside the game design, which could be a great thing.


-* So many things to do, so little time to spend. *-