Anti piracy in PC games?

[Yan007]

If you live in the US, they are selling you a US-console. Wanna play your Japanese games? That's fine. Go to an online retailer and order a Japanese console like the rest of us who actually respect game devs and pay for both the games and the platforms to play them on. Sure, I'd love my 3ds to be region-lock free, but I like importing games enough that I've bought the Japanese version of the console to play my imported games. So should you.

Here's the thing - In doing so you accept a $200-ish premium to be able to play games from a different region. That is, the price of an entire system.

I don't find that convenient in the slightest. Had there only been the matter of paying for shipping of a game, I would have no issues whatsoever.

Have had no issues whatsoever in fact. That's part of my point when I criticize region restrictions. I don't mind paying for "games". It's the addition of region locks that force me to buy additional hardware that pisses me off.

As for affordability, I can afford just about everything. Finding copies (Which usually means giving money to someone else but the developer, which we have already concluded can be an issue) or making copies run? That's far trickier.

I'm not using that as an excuse anyway. I don't excuse anything whatsoever and in fact, try to avoid doing such self serving selfish things.

I fail to see how I'm a hypocrite when I deride my own behaviour just as much. If anything, I don't criticize the practise as much as I do the justifications for it.

The entire "I wouldn't have bought it anyway" reasoning.

But maybe I'm the only one capable of making a distinction between the two.

You seem to misunderstand a very basic thing in my argument though - I'm also a jerk. I'm not making an exception of myself.

I think you are "making a distinction" because you need to compartmentalize. When someone believes something is wrong, they don't go around preaching against what they themselves do. If you really believed piracy is wrong, you wouldn't be doing it. If we have to give you a free pass because of inconvenience, what right do we have to judge anyone for making illegal copies of games they don't own?

Also, when you don't buy the console, you take away money from the engineers working on them. That it's a $200 or even $600 premium doe not matter. If you can't afford the console, don't play the games. Or, take another page from your own book and wait for a price drop before you buy.

 

[fix-the-spade]

I don't mean DRM anti piracy but more like Sims 4 and Game Developer Tycoon like where your in game progress is hampered if a pirated copy is detected.

No.

We've seen that whatever method of DRM is used, it's defeated within days and the only people who have to live with it are the paying customers.

Even gameplay 'tweaks' like gimping Batman's cape are still DRM, for something like that to work it needs some kind of auth check. All this equates to is money and time spent on something other than developing the game that is ultimately for nothing.

TLDR: History has shown that all anti piracy measures are useless, so publishers should just give it up already.

 

[Mutant1988]

I think you are "making a distinction" because you need to compartmentalize. When someone believes something is wrong, they don't go around preaching against what they themselves do. If you really believed piracy is wrong, you wouldn't be doing it. If we have to give you a free pass because of inconvenience, what right do we have to judge anyone for making illegal copies of games they don't own?

Also, when you don't buy the console, you take away money from the engineers working on them. That it's a $200 or even $600 premium doe not matter. If you can't afford the console, don't play the games. Or, take another page from your own book and wait for a price drop before you buy.

You don't have to give me a free pass on anything. But you should stop trying to justify piracy. Because it in itself cannot and should not be justified, for all the reasons which I have stated.

As for not paying for the console... I didn't make the same hardware (That I paid for) unable to play those other games. That's kind of my issue with region locking. It's not a physical property of the product. It's something put there specifically to prevent people from importing. Specifically, to make it impossible for them to play those games, as a means to control prices. I don't find that a good practise at all.

If you can't see how I would object to that, all matters of piracy aside, then I'm fairly certain that you are not a human. I would strongly suspect that you are a robot.

I judge anyone that acts purely out of self interest. Myself included. Which is why I avoid doing such things as much as possible, because I would like to have a better opinion of myself. I'm only human though and do make mistakes. But I'm not going to invent other reasons for why I do what I do or for why it's right or necessary.

Can anyone of you actually dispute the argument I put forth or do you prefer to just cite the bits where I'm honest about my own habits and use that as a means to dismiss everything I say?

Consider this - I could just as well have lied and tried to portray myself as a saintly customer that paid for absolutely everything I've ever used. But that would make me an even greater hypocrite, don't you think?

Also consider this - I only go on rants like these when people write in the defense of piracy. That's because there is no "justification" for it (The very practise itself) and it disturbs me that people insist there is. Especially the whole "I wouldn't have bought it anyway" cliché. If you didn't want to buy it, at all, then why are you playing it?

That's a piss poor excuse.

 

[Rattja]

Saw this thread and it instantly reminded me of this
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/03/13/mega-city-one-skylines-breaks-paradox-sale-records/

If you are gonna have some kind of DRM that right there basically sums up what seems to be the best right now.

To quote:
"As usual our plan for pirates is to make a great game even better through free updates ? making it more convenient to use Steam instead. It?s all about offering the superior service. That?s how we bring down piracy. By making the paid experience a superior one."

If you want to beat pirates, I believe that is the mindset you kinda have to have these days.

It's not about having it online or anything, but the support you get is so superior and so easy that you simply choose to buy it because of how much better it is.

Say you downloaded the game from a torrent or something, then a patch comes out and you have to do it all over again (if the patch is of note of course), that is a real drag. Most people would much rather have it do so automatically without you even noticing as long as it does not mean you are required to be online to play it.
Adding to that is the easy 1 click access to mods via workshop, it just don't get any faster than that.

So yeah, they should have DRM I think if it is like that because that way everyone benefits and everyone it makes everyone happy.

 

[The Bucket]

Using things without paying for them, without showing the most basic and direct form of respect for the creators, is despicable.

Doing so is essentially saying "I like your stuff, but not enough to let you be successful or even be able to survive making it".

Devil's Advocate Form Activate!

When one borrows a book from a library (or even borrows it from a friend), they are using it without paying for it. You can even borrow games from some libraries (my old one, for example). Similarly, if you buy it second hand, none of your money will go to the creator or publisher.

There's restrictions to the use of the library, in the form of return times and reservations. You cannot indefinitely acquire and use a book, movie or game from a library.

The reason why libraries are exempt is as a matter of media conservation and public education. To deny them the right to give people access to information and entertainment would have a catastrophic effect on society.

I'm not being hyperbolic. If you take away the few joys and means of education there is to those less fortunate, then you will see a marked increase in crime and cultural decay.

As for rentals, they always were and still are a scam. The only purpose they serve is to give money to the people least responsible for the creation of the product.

Same goes for second hand sales, which are only excused by the practical fact of limited physical copies.

It's also worth noting that in the music world, at least, the artist will receive only a fraction of the money from direct sales: often 10% or less. This doesn't counter your argument, of course, as the artist still makes money, but it's worth remembering that the money paid to show respect to an artist is almost entirely going to a publisher.

The solution to that issue cannot possibly be to deny them that fraction as well. But do tell, do you pirate music and then send money to the paypal of the artist, circumventing the "evil" record industry? I very much doubt that.

I would though, if I had the thousands required to pay the debt I owe. I'm not innocent by any means, but I actively make an effort to police my usage of things I have no legal or moral right to use.

I don't consider piracy as a necessary evil or some matter of convenience. Piracy is wrong, end of.

But what is also wrong is imposing restrictions to what can be accessed, as a matter of conservation and end user convenience.

I'd love to buy every single thing I've ever pirated. If it were possible. I don't pirate anything with the reasoning that I would never have paid for it anyway. That makes me a selfish jerk that demands things without giving anything back.

Piracy might be a way to circumvent an issue, but it's not a solution. It will never be a solution, because it robs creators of their right to succeed.

They can, but that's far from certain to actually happen. Many places will keep the original price, or close to it, for new copies, simply as a matter of course-- and the only cheaper ones will be pre-owned.

And, of course, with pre-owned copies, none of the money goes to the artist anyway, defeating one's purpose.

Again, the solution is not to steal the product. That benefits no one but yourself.

The solution is to demand a better market. And wouldn't you know it, we have gotten excellent markets in recent years - Like Steam and Good Old Games.

While I don't agree with Piracy, it is hardly the thing that is killing the industry like many people make it out to be. Even with all of their research, they haven't been able to prove that a pirated game is equal to a lost sale (or any form of lost income). Which is why it isn't punished as theft. In fact it is punished as a trust violation (copyright is a trust law, not an ownership law).

What is really hurting game developers are second hand stores buying player's used games for pennies on the dollar, then reselling them for between 85% and 93% of the price of a brand new game, even though they only paid around 5%-10% of the new game price for said item. Neither the publisher or the developer see a cent off of those purchases either, and to top that off stores like Gamestop are strong arming the publishers/developers to create custom content for them and give them exclusive rights to things that cost money to develop.

The other thing that isn't helping them is the stupidly intrusive DRM they keep buying and putting in their games. They have to pay for those licenses, then they have to pay to patch the problems they create, and throughout all of this, it didn't even manage to stop the game from being pirated. It only managed to cause the game to have issues and drive their paying customers away.

If they eliminated those two problems, they (publishers and developers) would be in much better shape overall.

Every industry has to deal with second hand sales. I dont know what method you have to combat it (besides making it impossible to resell physical games, which would be the most egregious form of DRM of all). And I dont have any sympathy for publishers being "strong armed" by Gamestop into making exclusive content for them. They're extremely well compensated for this and also use it to push day 1 sales, Gamestop doesnt have a gun to their heads and cant make them do anything.

 

[Mutant1988]

Every industry has to deal with second hand sales. I dont know what method you have to combat it (besides making it impossible to resell physical games, which would be the most egregious form of DRM of all). And I dont have any sympathy for publishers being "strong armed" by Gamestop into making exclusive content for them. They're extremely well compensated for this and also use it to push day 1 sales, Gamestop doesnt have a gun to their heads and cant make them do anything.

I never said there is a way. There isn't. Nor should there be. The right to resale is as old as economy itself. Used games are here to stay, because the means to get rid of them would be far, FAR more damaging to all of us.

To quote:
"As usual our plan for pirates is to make a great game even better through free updates ? making it more convenient to use Steam instead. It?s all about offering the superior service. That?s how we bring down piracy. By making the paid experience a superior one."

If you want to beat pirates, I believe that is the mindset you kinda have to have these days.

It's not about having it online or anything, but the support you get is so superior and so easy that you simply choose to buy it because of how much better it is.

Say you downloaded the game from a torrent or something, then a patch comes out and you have to do it all over again (if the patch is of note of course), that is a real drag. Most people would much rather have it do so automatically without you even noticing as long as it does not mean you are required to be online to play it.
Adding to that is the easy 1 click access to mods via workshop, it just don't get any faster than that.

So yeah, they should have DRM I think if it is like that because that way everyone benefits and everyone it makes everyone happy.

The more convenient you make it for people to give you money, the better. That's not even DRM, that's just good business sense.

Which usually is enough to convince those that aren't complete jerks to give you their money, at some point. Simple matter of psychology - We are nice to those that are nice to us. Or at least to those that can do us a favour.

 

[votemarvel]

I hate DRM and one of the first things I do after buying a game is download a crack for it if one is available.

Why as a paying customer am I made to feel like a thief when people who do pirate the game all too often get a better product.

 

[Mister K]

Novadays any anti-piracy measures exists only to prevent people pirating games in first few weeks, when the "hype" for the game is at it's peak. In the end any DRM is cracked, but while it is NOT cracked it most of the time hurts the consumer. Was it DRM of Dragon Age: Inquisition that destroyed HDDs?

Anyhow, Good Old Games for the win. Oh yeah, I am shilling hard and will shill untill GOG becomes crap. Hopefully never.

 

[Mutant1988]

Novadays any anti-piracy measures exists only to prevent people pirating games in first few weeks, when the "hype" for the game is at it's peak. In the end any DRM is cracked, but while it is NOT cracked it most of the time hurts the consumer. Was it DRM of Dragon Age: Inquisition that destroyed HDDs?

Anyhow, Good Old Games for the win. Oh yeah, I am shilling hard and will shill untill GOG becomes crap. Hopefully never.

Since their marketing basically amounts to "We are not as crap as the other guys", I doubt that will ever happen. DRM less games is a nice thing indeed, as is convenient emulation to old games to make them playable.

I still prefer Steam though. And physical copies of console games.

 

[Yan007]

I think you are "making a distinction" because you need to compartmentalize. When someone believes something is wrong, they don't go around preaching against what they themselves do. If you really believed piracy is wrong, you wouldn't be doing it. If we have to give you a free pass because of inconvenience, what right do we have to judge anyone for making illegal copies of games they don't own?

Also, when you don't buy the console, you take away money from the engineers working on them. That it's a $200 or even $600 premium doe not matter. If you can't afford the console, don't play the games. Or, take another page from your own book and wait for a price drop before you buy.

You don't have to give me a free pass on anything. But you should stop trying to justify piracy. Because it in itself cannot and should not be justified, for all the reasons which I have stated.

As for not paying for the console... I didn't make the same hardware (That I paid for) unable to play those other games. That's kind of my issue with region locking. It's not a physical property of the product. It's something put there specifically to prevent people from importing. Specifically, to make it impossible for them to play those games, as a means to control prices. I don't find that a good practise at all.

If you can't see how I would object to that, all matters of piracy aside, then I'm fairly certain that you are not a human. I would strongly suspect that you are a robot.

I judge anyone that acts purely out of self interest. Myself included. Which is why I avoid doing such things as much as possible, because I would like to have a better opinion of myself. I'm only human though and do make mistakes. But I'm not going to invent other reasons for why I do what I do or for why it's right or necessary.

Can anyone of you actually dispute the argument I put forth or do you prefer to just cite the bits where I'm honest about my own habits and use that as a means to dismiss everything I say?

As you are resorting to insults and saying I am not human, this will be my final response to you.

First, saying I'm advocating FOR piracy is disingenuous. I think piracy is absolutely wrong and there is no reason whatsoever to ever justify stealing games. Your argument is all over the place. On one hand, you are telling people who can't afford games to wait for price drops or live without them (I agree). On the other hand, you say region-locking is put in place as a measure to control prices and that it makes it okay to pirate the game/console. You should realize that what you are telling us is that piracy because of high local prices is wrong, but piracy because of high import prices is right. Don't you see the contradiction.

Also, it is perfectly legal for you to import consoles and games. It's not like there is a physical barrier preventing you from doing so. Also, there is a very big difference between a US and Japanese console : its BIOS/OS. As you are probably aware, running an emulator is legal, but downloading the BIOS of a console you don't own IS NOT. You probably also know that consoles of different regions have a different, although similar, BIOS.

Please, be consistent in your position regarding piracy and pay for your games AND consoles. Alternatively, you should write to your console manufacturers and ask them to remove region-locking or asking your congressmen to look into passing laws forbidding region-locking.

Personally, I'm sorry but I can't support any form of piracy whatsoever.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Any thing to hinder pirates is good. But at the same time whatever protection you put in place shouldnt punish people that bought your game legally. Its a fine line to walk to get it right.

 

[Mutant1988]

As you are resorting to insults and saying I am not human, this will be my final response to you.

I thought it was pretty obvious that the robot comment was a joke.

First, saying I'm advocating FOR piracy is disingenuous. I think piracy is absolutely wrong and there is no reason whatsoever to ever justify stealing games. Your argument is all over the place. On one hand, you are telling people who can't afford games to wait for price drops or live without them (I agree). On the other hand, you say region-locking is put in place as a measure to control prices and that it makes it okay to pirate the game/console. You should realize that what you are telling us is that piracy because of high local prices is wrong, but piracy because of high import prices is right. Don't you see the contradiction.

I've put in bold the parts I've never said. The games I've been able to import and play I have imported and played. The rest, well... I don't make any excuses for being a jerk, but I actively make an effort to be less of one.

I'm against region locking as it's a barrier to importing. And the more barriers you put in place, the more motivated people are to break them. I'm not saying that they should or that it's right, but it's a simple fact.

Please, be consistent in your position regarding piracy and pay for your games AND consoles. Alternatively, you should write to your console manufacturers and ask them to remove region-locking or asking your congressmen to look into passing laws forbidding region-locking.

Personally, I'm sorry but I can't support any form of piracy whatsoever.

I'm trying my best to pay for everything. And you're right to hold that stance. You are, in all ways, a better customer than me. I don't dispute that in any way. I'm still only disputing the expression of these trite justifications.

If you want to consider my reasoning for my own transgression an equally poor justification, then that's perfectly fair. I'm committing the same error after all. The rest is just semantics.

I do apologize for coming across as accusational. I genuinely forgot that you started this discussion by acting the devil's advocate.

My bad.

Region restriction as a means of price control should only be necessary for physical products, as a digital marketplace is perfectly capable of adjusting the prices to account for the cost of living in any given country and value of currency in real time.

I would love to be able to access the Japanese PSN and pay just the same prices I do on the European one. Same goes for just about any service. I'm against the barrier to availability first and foremost.

I know why physical products are region locked, as a matter of practicality. If you cannot afford to release your game in all places at once, you want to region lock for two reasons: To not exhaust markets sold to later (People importing skewers the numbers of games sold locally, as well as remove customers from the later release) and to not have the depreciation of value of the original release motivate people to import instead of buying the version you make for them.

 

[Mutant1988]

Most of the time it IS only an issue of shipping the game these days. Most consoles are region free. The vast majority of software out there will play on a system from anywhere in the world.

I know. And I fucking love that.

Got myself a Vita and Earth Defense Force 3 from Japan. That is EDF 2017 Portable, which only got a digital release in the West. That, is nice.

I also have 2 games from Japan on the PS3 and the US copy of 2 (Though one of them not intentionally) and also bought Okami HD for a friend (I'm fine with my PS2 copy). I'm very appreciative of the lack of region restriction.

I do wish for Nintendo to stop clinging to region locks though. It is what has kept me from buying a 3DS. Well, that and not having quite enough money to go around. But the solution is simply to NOT play any 3DS games. That has worked fine thus far.

But yeah, in the console race I'm betting only on the manufacturer that has no region restrictions. I want that to be the standard, especially as we move more and more to digital distribution.

 

[sanquin]

Anti piracy is either too invasive, or doesn't work. On the other hand, I do have a nice example of a company that specifically didn't put anti piracy on their game because they believed in customer loyalty. And it worked, because they made good enough games that they sold well enough for not one, but two sequels. The series I'm talking about is The Witcher.

 

[DoPo]

Was it DRM of Dragon Age: Inquisition that destroyed HDDs?

1. It was SSDs not HDDs
2. It didn't even do it. Believing a lie and perpetuating, is not what this industry needs. Or any industry, really[footnote]Although, I suppose your view point would be the opposite if you're in marketing[/footnote].

 

[Albino Boo]

Anti piracy is either too invasive, or doesn't work. On the other hand, I do have a nice example of a company that specifically didn't put anti piracy on their game because they believed in customer loyalty. And it worked, because they made good enough games that they sold well enough for not one, but two sequels. The series I'm talking about is The Witcher.

Same old nonsense, 80% of the witcher sales are on steam which is a drm platform, buy hey why bother with facts.

 

[DoPo]

On the other hand, I do have a nice example of a company that specifically didn't put anti piracy on their game because they believed in customer loyalty. And it worked, because they made good enough games that they sold well enough for not one, but two sequels. The series I'm talking about is The Witcher.

Not a good enough example The Witcher and The Witcher 2 both had DRM. It was later stripped, yes, but it was put there in the first place.

I think DRM has become some sort of myths and legends instead of, you know, actual thing.

 

[Mutant1988]

Was it DRM of Dragon Age: Inquisition that destroyed HDDs?

1. It was SSDs not HDDs
2. It didn't even do it. Believing a lie and perpetuating, is not what this industry needs. Or any industry, really

Honestly, the only DRM I've ever heard from that destroyed hardware was Starforce. And it did that by changing the speed of your disc drive (IIRC).

Pain in the ass to get rid off as well, since it installs itself without your knowledge and finding it's essential files for removal needs to be done manually. It practically functions like malware.

Other DRM is mostly just short sighted and drastically inconvenient.

Anything that requires remote server authentication will cease to function once those servers are good. That is not a good thing, at all.