Always-on-DRM - why buy games with it?

[TheCommanders]

I don't like always on DRM, but I sometimes buy games that have it for a few reasons. Firstly, I've never noticed that a significant enough number of people are willing to boycott this sort of thing to make a difference, so unless there is some sort of organized movement (and evidence that it would make a difference) I'm not going to not buy a game on principle. Secondly, if I'm interested in getting a game and it turns out that it has that kind of DRM, I can't magically turn off my interest in the game. Since I'm not willing to pirate it, that leaves me with the options of living with it, or not having the game I wanted.

If people feel like making a statement and not buying a game on principle, more power to you, I guess, but that sort of action has shown to be consistently irrelevant in the big picture.

 

[The White Hunter]

You just dont have the will power to not buy is what it comes down to, and just because there are bigger issues in the world (I laugh my ass off at the 'special' nature of this argument) doesnt mean you cant only take a stand on one thing, you are perfectly capable of taking a stand on multiple issues at once, if...you know, you have the willpower.

I love the rhetoric we throw around in our gaming threads. "Taking a stand". Precious.

First person to name check Rosa Parks gets a cookie.

Gamers not buying always online-DRM games are kinda like Rosa Parks, taking a stand against a society that forces them to sit at the back of buses and give up their seats to the gamers that buy games that have online DRM [sub]Oh wait...[/sub].

Now where's my cookie guppy?

On topic, I don't buy games with always online DRM because it kinda sucks if my net dies, but I don't really care that much. Steam is a better form of DRM, and if a game has shitty online DRM I have consoles I can play on now where it isn't a problem. Whatever comes in the future will come and as a gamer I'd rather play games than not, even if it means getting involved with shitty practices.

It's also sadly on the instances where refusing to buy isn't the best solution, because the company doesn't care, if you're a legitimate user and a fan and have your complaints and a number of other legitimate users have the same complaint, the company may take note and alter it's practices to better satisfy it's customers and save itself some cash.

Companies like Ubisoft are fucking retards about it though.

 

[The White Hunter]

b) prisoner's dilemma, it would be in the best interest if all gamers work together to get rid of always on DRM, but since you can't be sure that everyone is actualy helping, each individual has a better chance of a positive (at least being able to play a good game) outcome if he thinks only about himself.

Game theory. I like it, hre's a diagram to support your argument:

 

[Smertnik]

I just don't care. If I want to play a game I buy it, simple as that. Sure, I still prefer DRM-free games but since DRM has never inconvenienced me in any way and I have a steady internet connection I really don't mind it, even the always-online type.

 

[BoneDaddy_SK]

You can take a stand for anything, in this case just not buying a product with a particular kind of DRM is taking a stand.

Again, considering you are buying Sim City...Not surprised you are entertained

No, it's just doing what is endemic to a capitalist market: you're not buying products that you don't want or don't like. It's really not all that remarkable. When I choose to get a salad instead of pizza, I'm not taking a stand against fast food, I'm just being conscious of my weight.

Refusing to buy any product that includes something is another animal entirely even if you are incapable of seeing it.

So you're really going to claim that the only reason people don't agree with you is because they're not smart enough to see it or something like that? That was fast. Usually someone has to bring up feminism before those arguments get trotted out.

 

[Blunderboy]

People buy because they want to play the game more than the always on puts them off simple.

That's it. It's a simple answer. People have looked at a situation and reached a conclusion.

Now can we STOP HAVING THESE FUCKING THREADS?!

 

[BloatedGuppy]

If you dont buy a bit of soup because its not on sale thats a purchasing decision, I make thsoe every day as I look over my steam list.

Refusing to buy any product that includes something is another animal entirely even if you are incapable of seeing it.

And who is portraying themselves as a revolutionary? I was merely mocking someone who is too weak willed to not buy something they disagree with. It is like a vegan who cant stop eating bacon, they are there to be laughed at.

And really, considering I am in a profession where I carry a gun every day, I dont think I need more drama in my life, and I have plenty of purpose in my life thank you. I would add a few choice names and words, but you know, nazi-mods and all that.

Again, no. You are refusing to buy things for your own personal reasons and values. Hectoring and mocking other people for failing to ascribe to your reasons and values is not normally the hallmark of an open mind.

If you want to use self-aggrandizing language such as "taking a stand" to describe your brave struggle against the tyranny of gaming corporations because you had to enter a login code or because they tried to sell you a $1 hat, you can do that. I just wouldn't expect everyone to take you entirely seriously.

Now can we STOP HAVING THESE FUCKING THREADS?!

That never works. =(

Now where's my cookie guppy?

Oh, you're going to get a cookie alright.

The catch: It's OATMEAL RAISIN. And it's STALE.

 

[Tohuvabohu]

I usually don't. I consider it a big negative point.

However, if something that I really, really, really wanted had always online DRM, I'd still buy it. Bioshock Infinite or The Last of Us for example.

Same here. The only game purchase I can think of that had always online DRM was Diablo 3. I 'justified' that by the fact I never played Diablo 2 offline, and would never play Diablo 3 offline even if I had the choice. And that at the time, it was one of my most anticipated game releases that I could remember.

On the day I made my Diablo 3 purchase, I came to terms with the fact that I was part of the problem, feeding the ravenous beast with my money, contributing to the moral decay of the videogaming medium, and fueling the great incoming videogame apocalypse.

Spoiler

[/spoiler]

The game itself was disappointing and I haven't played it in months. In the unlikely event it were to be shut down any time soon, I wouldn't miss it.

In many other cases, always on DRM is a major negative point against a game. Even if I've been connected to the internet every day since 1998. It doesn't automatically mean a dealbreaker, but it's not something I can easily ignore.

 

[4RM3D]

You're absolutely wrong on that regard. If Blizzard decided tomorrow that it was no longer profitable to run their Diablo 3 servers then you will never be able to play it again. A game you paid full price for, probably bought the collector's edition too but it doesn't matter. Once those servers are gone so is your game. You have an expensive paperweight if you bought the physical edition, that's all.

However you're clearly content to be at the mercy of your publisher overlords. Power to you in that regard, but I'm still happy that I never bought a game with always online DRM. And I plan to continue not buying hoping that the rest of the gamers out there realise what it is they're supporting and stop buying the games.

Even if I have to never play my favourite game's sequel, ever. I will no cave to that bullshit.

While that is true, I think the always-on for Diablo 3 is justified understandable. HOLD ON...I will immediately mention that I hate DRM and I loathe always-on DRM. The thing is: Diablo 3 has been made for co-op and has a lot of online features. Even if Blizzard made a special offline mode. Those characters would never be able to go online to prevent exploits. And that is a heavy price to pay. I understand that some people are willing pay this price, but I think that is the minority.

Now, lets jump to Ubisoft and, for example, Assassin's Creed. There is NO REASON whatsoever for that game to be always-on. It's a singleplayer game and you shouldn't have to be always online.

 

[EeviStev]

And who is portraying themselves as a revolutionary? I was merely mocking someone who is too weak willed to not buy something they disagree with. It is like a vegan who cant stop eating bacon, they are there to be laughed at.

All vegans are laughed at. It's because they act all high and mighty about how they're taking a stand because meat is murder and so everyone else are murderers etc, when everyone else is saying "guys, we're just doing what makes us happy and seriously, why don't you go after someone slightly higher up on that particular ladder?"

Just like everyone is laughing at you. Paralleled.

 

[Therumancer]

It's largely because gamers tolerate this stuff rather than going without, especially when it comes to large "peer pressure" titles like Call Of Duty and the like, nobody wants to risk being the one who isn't playing when all their friends are.

Truthfully I think we are approaching the point where companies are going to push consumers too far, I tend to look at EA's losses, and some of the reactions to the plans for microtransactions in "Dead Space 3". Enough big crashes and I think the industry will either relent, or we'll see a video game industry crash, and the new industries that rise from the ashes will have learned a lesson, at least for a while.

 

[KeyMaster45]

If enough people simply refuse to buy a game with always-on DRM, the company will absolutely have to remove it. The reality that most people don't seem to realize is that we, the consumers, still have that power. Why would we be so stupid to give it to a corporation and thank them for it?

We tried that with From Dust. Ubisoft eventually caved and removed the always on DRM, but then they went back on that and stuck it right back in when no one was looking. That was after it had gotten a boost in sales from the DRM being removed mind you.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Enough big crashes and I think the industry will either relent, or we'll see a video game industry crash, and the new industries that rise from the ashes will have learned a lesson, at least for a while.

You're never going to see another crash like the one in the early 80's. The industry has changed. There are way too many players now.

The "video game crash" was more or less the Atari crash.

 

[MiriaJiyuu]

Of course, I CAN go somewhere else to get tube socks... if you want to play Assassin's Creed 3, you sort of don't have an alternative other than playing the console version, so I feel bad for you.

Sorry, I'm kinda confused here, your implying that Assassin's Creed 3 for the PC has always-online DRM. It doesn't, in fact, in a uncharacteristic move by Ubisoft, they scrapped this type of DRM altogether. The last three AC games, as well as most of their games released in the last two years have just bound the CD key of your purchase to your Uplay account, i.e. you have to launch it from your account, or in my case my steam account and be logged into Uplay as me.

OT: I don't really care about always-online DRM, I won't be playing any game forever, limited use serial keys are the more annoying form of DRM in my opinion, (you can only install it X times, yeah screw you publisher).

 

[Vegosiux]

Honestly, this crap about always online DRM has got to be one of the more stupid tirades. In about 10 or 15 years, everything will be always online. There will be no offline.

Time to start making arrangements then, get my will written and all. Just in case. But that's just me. "Can" I be online 24/7? Yes. Yes, I can. Do I "want" to be online 24/7? No. No, I do not. The moment I cannot spend my time on my own terms is the moment I am no longer willing to spend it at all.

 

[BoneDaddy_SK]

Oh, and we wouldn't have this problem if pirates weren't so fucking persistent and we didn't rush to defend them. We reap what we sew.

That logic is tenuous at best. DRM does little more than inconvenience pirates once. Once a torrent appears with the DRM stripped out, that's it. The publisher already lost. A quick glance at the Pirate Bay shows that DRM is doing nothing to curb piracy. If anyting, it's exacerbating it. This isn't a statement in defense of piracy, before you attempt to characterize it as such. It's a simple observation of cause and effect.

People have an almost universal habit of thinking, "If this thing I'm doing isn't working, then I must not be doing it hard enough." Unfortunately, that's seldom the correct solution. And that's the reason we still have crap DRM that's not accomplishing its stated purpose.

 

[TheProfessor234]

As Jim Sterling has said, as long as a pirate can provide things with less effort on the user, there will always be people who use their services. Though obviously pricy isn't that high rampart or we wouldn't have DRM conversations because no one would be dealing with it. Honestly, I would like to see a AAA game/title go out without DRM or any other crap contract or whatever and just see how well it sells. Take out all the money squeezing bull and just see what happens.

Of course it'll never happen.



As for myself, if there is something I want to play, I'll go through DRM. I won't let something like that stop me from enjoying my favorite hobby/pastime/life passion. Sure, it's possible that me doing this "hurts" the gaming industry but until there is a movement, I'm just a single gamer with no power.

 

[latiasracer]

Because, You know, Maybe i want to play that game?


It's a pain in the ass all the various DRM softwares ect that need to be installed and stuff, but it's hardly anything that effects me majorly. If they claim to have rights to my internal organs once i install their software, then i'll say "Hang on a second..." but otherwise, 9/10 it's worth it for the game.

For example, it took me a good 5 hours wrestling with GFWL to let me play DiRT 2 and actually save my progress, but i managed it, and i got atleast 30+ Playtime out of it.

Not to mention : "

Because I look at the back of the box and it says "Internet connection is required to play this game". I then think "Do I have an internet connection? Yes I do. I'm gonna buy this game."

Exactly this.