Building a Better Kind of DRM

Recommended Videos

coldfrog

Can you feel around inside?
Dec 22, 2008
1,320
0
0
Royas said:
Problem with that is, it makes a really convenient excuse for the developer or publisher when things don't quite work right. Much cheaper to claim that it's a deliberate trap rather than spending time and money fixing a bug that only affects a small percentage of the customer base. Additionally, if the devs start doing this, I'll bet we'll see a huge number of these trap bugs become real bugs when the trap implementation gets screwed up. Any part of a game's code can be buggy, including the part that implements these bugs.

The only good aspect I see to the deliberate bug method is this: Developers will have to stop blaming the publishers for the DRM. It was always a shared blame, but now the devs will have to do a lot more work to implement it, making their portion of the blame a lot easier to see.
I think you're discrediting them a bit too much. It seems unlikely to me that a company would lie about something like that, especially if it would be rather easy to prove that you've bought a legitimate copy of the game. However, the actual bug possibility hadn't occurred to me. While something like SecuRom can be perfected and then tacked on to any game, something like this has to be made part of the program itself. The advantage being harder to pirate, the disadvantage being it's easier to become buggy. However, I'm sure they could at least ameliorate this somewhat by having extensive QA done involving that particular trap area. I'd still prefer it anyway, since bugs happen and I've never bought a game with a bug that made it unplayable.

Asehujiko said:
There's the problem that unless you tell them EXACTLY what the DRM does(effectively rendering it moot because cracking groups can just track down every item you listed and fix it), there's no telling what is DRM and what is faulty design. Then the question for the buyer becomes "This game may or may not have drm that is very effective at annoying pirates for a few weeks, also, this game may or may not be a buggy piece of shit, do i want to spend money on it and have a large risk of it being the latter?"
Yes there is. If you legitimately bought the game and you encounter a problem it is a bug. Simple as that.

Well, OK, not quite as simple if it just happens that the bug is in the DRM (as mentioned above) but like I said, if they did pirate it, it seems unlikely that they would post it since they can't know themselves if they would be revealing their identity, and if they DO post the issue, the company can easily deal with it as they will know they pirated their copy.
 

darkroot

New member
Jan 2, 2009
18
0
0
I agree with Ravek if the people really would of wanted to buy the games they would have but if they just pirate them then most likely they won't play then or will only play them for a short while. Also the people who crack these games encourage people who pirate them to buy it if they like it. Pirating is really better demo retribution. People want to support companies that make games they like.
 

008Zulu_v1legacy

New member
Sep 6, 2009
6,019
0
0
Anton P. Nym said:
If you want to put a crimp into piracy, leave SecureROM and other technosexual fetish gear alone... you're better off spending that money on tightening up inventory controls to prevent pirates from boosting copies before release, and using a less expensive and more customer-friendly check that's "good enough" to require an adult to break.
Works in theory. The factories where these games are produced, the workers are paid in cents per hour, not dollars. So if someone offers them $5 for a dvd off the first run the poor factory worker will take the $5 and write off the missing disc as damaged during production. That or they will accidently leave the central computer's firewall open on a certain port so the pirates can directly download the game. Or any one of a dozen other methods. The point is the underpaid factory workers are what you need to improve.

But I am with Shamus on this, as a member of the DRM cartel I find suing 82 y/o grandmothers who don't have computers or people who have died 10 years ago for copyright infringment to be the best form of anti-piracy.
 

FeverusDreams

New member
Feb 22, 2009
6
0
0
No. This approach is playing into the pirating game.

Solution: Copy Steam. Or, better, deliver your game through Steam. Sell it for half of what you think it should cost. Spend money you don't think you have on updated content; if your game is good, it should sell more. The savings gained by avoiding retail costs will increase your margins.

Make multiplayer integral to the gameplay experience. Do you see people playing pirated Steam games? Yes. On Steam? No.

Or, make an MMPORG. Please don't, though, because they suck.
 

Knight Templar

Moved on
Dec 29, 2007
3,848
0
0
feather240 said:
If they pirated a copy you could erase all their save file after it accumulates a certain amount of hours, but it would have to be very carefully done so as not to hurt the honest customers. YOU LISTENING BETHESDA?
What have Bethesda done?

FeverusDreams said:
No. This approach is playing into the pirating game.
How so?
It seems to me that making the pirate copy inferior to the real game is the right thing to do. Right now DRM is giving pirates power as it makes their version better than the original, this idea would change that. Right now the downside to pirating is it makes you an arse but if the downsides were big, and invisable untill activated, that would make a lot of people have second thoughts.

Of course some people will allways pirate, but they are not the people DRM targets.
People have locks on their doors, but other people can pick locks, or bash the door down or whatever. So a lock doesn't stop home invasion/robbery, but it makes it harder. When things are hard to do less people will do them. This methoid would be like placing hidden traps in your house, even if a person beats them all he won't be able to sell as much of his loot because people will be afraid the loot is rigged with traps.
 

Asehujiko

New member
Feb 25, 2008
2,119
0
0
coldfrog said:
Yes there is. If you legitimately bought the game and you encounter a problem it is a bug. Simple as that.

Well, OK, not quite as simple if it just happens that the bug is in the DRM (as mentioned above) but like I said, if they did pirate it, it seems unlikely that they would post it since they can't know themselves if they would be revealing their identity, and if they DO post the issue, the company can easily deal with it as they will know they pirated their copy.
The problem is knowing it before buying. If i spent 65 euros(about $80) on a game that turns out to be buggier then Darkest Of Days, i would demand my money back and not buy any of their sequels. And again, i refer you to what happened with Iron Lore. Pirates DO post on forums and if bug reports stating that the game is unplayable outnumber all other posts 50:1, the game won't sell.
 

Royas

New member
Apr 25, 2008
539
0
0
coldfrog said:
Royas said:
Problem with that is, it makes a really convenient excuse for the developer or publisher when things don't quite work right. Much cheaper to claim that it's a deliberate trap rather than spending time and money fixing a bug that only affects a small percentage of the customer base. Additionally, if the devs start doing this, I'll bet we'll see a huge number of these trap bugs become real bugs when the trap implementation gets screwed up. Any part of a game's code can be buggy, including the part that implements these bugs.

The only good aspect I see to the deliberate bug method is this: Developers will have to stop blaming the publishers for the DRM. It was always a shared blame, but now the devs will have to do a lot more work to implement it, making their portion of the blame a lot easier to see.
I think you're discrediting them a bit too much. It seems unlikely to me that a company would lie about something like that, especially if it would be rather easy to prove that you've bought a legitimate copy of the game. However, the actual bug possibility hadn't occurred to me. While something like SecuRom can be perfected and then tacked on to any game, something like this has to be made part of the program itself. The advantage being harder to pirate, the disadvantage being it's easier to become buggy. However, I'm sure they could at least ameliorate this somewhat by having extensive QA done involving that particular trap area. I'd still prefer it anyway, since bugs happen and I've never bought a game with a bug that made it unplayable.
You've been lucky thus far, then. I know of very few people who haven't had a game or two that was virtually or completely unplayable due to bugs. Admittedly, we are talking about bugs that couldn't be found by QA, bugs that were caused by interfacing with particular hardware and particular drivers, but they were bugs nevertheless. That's the kind of bugs they have to worry about, those small, little ones they literally can't test for, because they can't test every possible configuration. Even SecuROM can wreak merry havoc on a system, and that's an add-on system.

And I wouldn't count on QA becoming any more rigorous. As the economy tightens, you'll probably see it being cut more and more. This is an industry that recently produced a port of a console game that wouldn't run on Vista if it had more that 2 GB of RAM. That's the type of thing one developer's QA let through recently. That's the sort of blindingly obvious thing that these guys can miss, they sure as hell aren't going to catch any small bugs connected with the copy protection.

Finally, I don't think I'm discrediting the publishers too much. They think like corporate suits, not gamers. If they think lying will make them more money, guess what? They'll lie. Even if it's a lie that is easily proven as such, they'll still lie. That's pretty much what corporations do. Cynical of me, but I've seen enough of it that I can't believe anything that the larger game publishers say, at least not without triple checking the information elsewhere.
 

Ravek

New member
Aug 6, 2009
302
0
0
DeadlyYellow said:
Ravek said:
You do not want to make pirated versions of the game broken! If someone who has pirated the game enjoys it, he'll not buy it later because he already owns a copy.
I fixed the logical folly in your statement.
You're claiming it doesn't happen? I myself have done this, and I know four others who did.

I can't say how often it happens, because decent statistical evidence on this subject simply doesn't exist.
 

FeverusDreams

New member
Feb 22, 2009
6
0
0
Knight Templar said:
feather240 said:
If they pirated a copy you could erase all their save file after it accumulates a certain amount of hours, but it would have to be very carefully done so as not to hurt the honest customers. YOU LISTENING BETHESDA?
What have Bethesda done?

FeverusDreams said:
No. This approach is playing into the pirating game.
How so?
It seems to me that making the pirate copy inferior to the real game is the right thing to do. Right now DRM is giving pirates power as it makes their version better than the original, this idea would change that. Right now the downside to pirating is it makes you an arse but if the downsides were big, and invisable untill activated, that would make a lot of people have second thoughts.

Of course some people will allways pirate, but they are not the people DRM targets.
People have locks on their doors, but other people can pick locks, or bash the door down or whatever. So a lock doesn't stop home invasion/robbery, but it makes it harder. When things are hard to do less people will do them. This methoid would be like placing hidden traps in your house, even if a person beats them all he won't be able to sell as much of his loot because people will be afraid the loot is rigged with traps.
The very method you're using makes cracking your game especially attractive. This eggs the pirates on, and unless your game is really, really hard to crack they'll win (as with Batman). Competition to release the first "real" full crack of the game will be intense, but all most downloaders will see is the finished product going up on TPB.

Frankly, the requirement to connect online in order to play is the only thing we've seen so far that works. Of course, this brings you lots of flak, so the solution is to either make an online-only game or tie in critical sections of your game (multiplayer) to the online experience. You can ignore the pirate multiplayer servers (or give them the bnetd treatment); if you did your job right, your servers kick their rears HARD and everyone wants to be with you. Updates can be partially tied in - they'll eventually hit the pirate market but if your updates are meaningful and frequent it's big value-added.

You can buy a Steam game, go into offline mode, no problem. You can go pirate it, but getting later updates may be a pain and you lose all the advantages of the network. Meanwhile, Valve doesn't have to spend buttloads of money programming DRM - they can use it to add real value instead.
 

Epitome

New member
Jul 17, 2009
703
0
0
DRM is part of the problem, I for one am glad of the existence of piracy. I does alot of good for customers as its a source of competition , anybody else remember when cds were an extra ?5 a pop than they are now. Piracy brought down that cost that was just lining pockets. Part of the problem I see with the greed of the publishers,I have the utmost respect for devs, especially the innovate ones. But to my mind Publishers are vultures who stamp a brand on, demand the removal of all things "edgy" that might make a new title good and then jack up the price and take a more than healty percentage.

Does anybody else not hae a problem with the tactics they use to protect themselves? Blatently bribing politicans and abusing legislaton.Look at the DMCA and what it was originally for and what is used for now. Frivolous lawsuits that cripple people finacally for life, suing the old and the dead?

You can argue all you want with the pirates but if teh publishers had their way they would be in direct control of the whole process deciding when, where and how much with the law backing them. DRM has a history of screwing over the customer while pirates enjoy superior products, sure you can delay and stall, but not for long. Pirates are not customers, and harming customers only creates more pirates. Focus should not be on punishing pirates but on rewarding customers. Trying to shut down the second hand market, is that really whats best for you the consumer? To not own what you part with your cash for?
 

paketep

New member
Jul 14, 2008
260
0
0
Won't work, but at least buyers would have a better deal. And I'm onboard with whatever that deletes SecuROM from the face of the earth.
 

Helmutye

New member
Sep 5, 2009
161
0
0
The whole issue of DRM is rooted in backwards thinking and an intense desire to preserve a world that is already long gone. It is like trying to build a wall to protect your city from air strikes and ballistic missiles. The solution to the problem is not to keep building a taller and taller wall--eventually, you will reach the limit of what is architecturally possible, and it will still not be enough, and long before then you will have blocked out the sun or crushed your city under megatons of rock. Planes can always fly higher, and pirates can always be sneakier and more tenacious. The solution is to change the situation so that you don't have to defend yourself anymore. The solution is to make it pointless to attack you in the first place.

The problem that game companies are now facing is the same problem that the music industry faced not that long ago, and I believe it is the same problem that the car companies and probably lots of other industries are grappling with, even though they don't realize it. The solution to this problem is very counter-intuitive, and I can't imagine anyone would have the guts to risk their millions of dollars trying it. But here it is:

The problem is that companies still think that product sales are how they make money.

Look at how something like Steam works. It is a program, sure, but its value comes from convenience and service. Even if every single game offered on it is pirated and given out for free, people will still use Steam because it is convenient in a way that pirates cannot duplicate, unless they band together and form a competing company--and even that would be great, because the competition would result in even better services for the customers. Valve can still make great games, but the games are just an attraction. They don't have to charge tons of money for them. They don't even have to make them, if they don't want, because there are thousands of people willing to do that for them. They can make their money by providing access to them in a highly convenient format.

Therefore, the solution is to stop trying to stop pirates. Stop putting crud in your product that pirates can remove to make their version better. Don't try to make a better game than the pirates--make the exact same game. And then provide superior access to it. People muck about with torrents and all that because it is easier, or at least no less difficult, than bothering with online registration and all that. But a game company could, if they wanted, make a superior way of accessing these games. They could make it way easier than screwing with torrents or dealing with shady and anonymous ripoff artists. They could offer a simple, quick, and guaranteed SAFE version of the product, and make their money charging modest amounts for that service. The less they charge, the more people they're likely to get, and therefore the more money they're likely to make!

Valve understands this, and I think they will do fine. But the big companies who still cling to the past will soon become as antiquated and ineffectual as the record companies and bands who still think that the best way to make money off of music is to sell whole CDs for $15.99 at FYE.
 

Dhatz

New member
Aug 18, 2009
302
0
0
you can't use servers,nor discs, because neither lasts forever, but also codes can be keygenned, and so you can't have a functional DRM that will ensure to work as long as we have the game installed. the key is service above standard and betatesting for those in the club.
I disrespect steam, because they don't test the updates before they release them, and behave like they owned the world, because there is no way to get a game of steam that doesn't require it to run, as a consequence, all mods i know of also have to use it(if they don't crack the game they are modding). Best way is to have a service so good that there will be no need for anyone to modify the content of downloaded games (4 example if they don't want to have the client running). i might be whrong about some bits because I know steam only from third hand.
 

tsolless

New member
Jul 15, 2009
243
0
0
People should stop thinking of pirates as potential buyers. They aren't and they most certainly are not going to start buying games if you make the DRM even worse.
 

GoldenShadow

New member
May 13, 2008
205
0
0
What they should do is not make the game broken. Say for instance a RTS game like Supreme Commander, your ACU a baddass with a thousand HP. If the game detects its not legit, it will just give him 100 HP. Or in a game like HL2 near the end of the game when you're supposed to get the blue super gravity gun. If the game detects it is not legit, you don't get the upgrade and keep your orange gravity gun, rendering the final part unfinishable.
 

Ravek

New member
Aug 6, 2009
302
0
0
DeadlyYellow said:
Ravek said:
You're claiming it doesn't happen?
I'm not claiming it doesn't happen, just claiming it isn't logical.
Strictly cost-benefit, that's true. But excluding moral choices from a piracy discussion is not a good idea. The choice between buying a game or pirating it isn't black and white. Some people are prepared to buy games without knowing whether they're good, some people don't buy anything, and others buy what they think is worth it, even if they've already pirated it.
 

Knight Templar

Moved on
Dec 29, 2007
3,848
0
0
FeverusDreams said:
Knight Templar said:
The very method you're using makes cracking your game especially attractive. This eggs the pirates on, and unless your game is really, really hard to crack they'll win (as with Batman). Competition to release the first "real" full crack of the game will be intense, but all most downloaders will see is the finished product going up on TPB.
"but all most downloaders", is it all or most?
Anyway they are going to win anyway, see what I wrote before.
Up untill now nothing has worked, its just plain stupid to use that as an excuse for avoiding a better system.
 

insanelich

Reportable Offender
Sep 3, 2008
443
0
0
This idea is stupid and five seconds of thought could have revealed that before posting it for the public.

If a game glitches and thinks a legit user is a pirate you're up shit creek without a paddle unless you don't give a shit about your customers after they have paid for the game. Doubly so if the user cannot know if the piracy protection has been activated or not.

It'd be, more than ever, a reason to pirate more rather than the opposite.