The Impossible DRM

[Ushario]

You lot all whinge about DRM, but I bet many of you have pirated games.

It is hypocritical of you, and just reinforces the fact that new ways to stop pirates need to be found. It is illegal, you are hurting peoples livelihoods, and you should be prosecuted.

Stop bitching about DRM, and stop being part of the problem.

 

[Dev Null]

He's right, but at the same time, this isn't a grand revelation. And I think the management folks working for the Big Boys know he's right. The problem is, they're publicly traded, and the old guys in ties who give them money don't know nufum bout these kids and their computin' machines. They want the products they invest in "protected", so that when the "protection" is compromised, they can cry piracy and try to get sentences increased. It's just your typical "business with old stupids" at work again.

So tell the investors that its protected by copy protection "at least as good as SecuROM", and pocket the money...

 

[Arkengetorix]

You lot all whinge about DRM, but I bet many of you have pirated games.

It is hypocritical of you, and just reinforces the fact that new ways to stop pirates need to be found. It is illegal, you are hurting peoples livelihoods, and you should be prosecuted.

Stop bitching about DRM, and stop being part of the problem.

Gamers have been putting up with garbage and crud for many years. No other industry on the planet would survive if they treated their customers like a bunch of orifices to be fucked.

Gaming companies release games and then expect us to foot the bill for their shoddy product and then cry about it when their company goes bust. I have no sympathy for those that don't understand basic economics.

Frankly if your company goes bust its your own fault, not the fault of some conspiracy of malignant basement nerds. Accept responsibility for your failure and grow some balls.

 

[antipunt]

DRM technically prevents piracy a 'tad' bit, but the amount that it affects paying customers is ridiculous

 

[KDR_11k]

You lot all whinge about DRM, but I bet many of you have pirated games.

It is hypocritical of you, and just reinforces the fact that new ways to stop pirates need to be found. It is illegal, you are hurting peoples livelihoods, and you should be prosecuted.

Stop bitching about DRM, and stop being part of the problem.

Stopping people from pointing out that the Emperor is not wearing clothes won't prevent him from catching a cold, even if the people are naked themselves. It's a fact of the physical universe that perfect DRM is not possible. Telling people they are filthy criminals doesn't suddently make DRM work (and is the whole mentality that results in punishing DRM, they see the user not as a customer but as an enemy).

As for the whole "OnLive will save us" bullshit that came up again, OnLive basically amounts to renting gaming systems instead of selling them with the added problem of latencies. No, from what we know so far quantum teleportation does not violate causality (and causality includes that information may not propagate faster than the speed of light) so for all we know latencies are not possible to eliminate without simply moving the system closer to the user. You know what's a better and simpler idea than that? LETTING PEOPLE BUY THEIR OWN SYSTEMS.

The whole "how can we fix piracy" demand is stupid. Just forget about it and move on instead of living in the delusion that you can somehow turn those piracy numbers into sales numbers. Yes, you may be able to force some people to buy it but don't forget that the requirements for downloading are MUCH lower than those for purchasing, no pirate is going to convert all his warez downloads into purchases even if you make DRM 100% effective. They'll get more picky about what to get, get fewer games and in the end I suspect that for most games their piracy numbers will have a near zero conversion rate to sales as they simply get trimmed from the list of games to get. If it costs nothing to get a game you can afford to get anything that looks remotely interesting, when you have to pay 45-70€ per game you'll be a whole LOT pickier about what you actually purchase. Pirating a 70€, 50% average rating game for laughs is one thing, buying it is something else.

How about instead of trying to force the veteran pirates into buying your game you simply look for people who aren't buying the game because they're not interested and make them interested? That's gotta be significantly easier than a cat and mouse game with crackers. Of course you sometimes get the impression that execs think everybody loves their game and anything less than selling to every household in the world is because of piracy...

 

[Crystalgate]

To the uninformed: The goal of DRM isn't to stop piracy--everyone already knows that's impossible. The goal is mainly to slow it down. Having a game uncracked for several days or more (Mass Effect, Bioshock, etc) can have a huge impact in sales.

2kGames Mark Reins:
"We achieved our goals. We were uncracked for 13 whole days. We were happy with it...You can't afford to be cracked. As soon as you're gone, you're gone, and your sales drop astronomically if you've got a day-one crack."

This is also the same idea behind Microsoft's new anti-piracy tech:
Drew Johnston, the product unit manager for the Windows Gaming Platform:
"We've heard from publishers that preauthorized release before streetdate can... they can lose half the sales, the revenue of the game. This is specifically aimed at helping reduce that for the publisher."

I say more power to them in trying to stop the pirates. Granted, there may come a point where the DRM/anti-piracy measures start to interfere with game enjoyment (and for some gamers, this point has been reached). However, I'd sooner stop playing games then start pointing the finger toward those trying to protect their games.

How many more sales did 2kGames get from having their game uncracked 13 days past release? Subtract from that number the number of people who didn't buy the game due to the DRM and then count the money lost on developing the thing. Did they still go with profit and if yes, how much? Also, while they may have gone uncracked for 13 days, Spore wasn't that lucky. What is the average number of days a game with a DRM goes uncracked? The number of days you're expected to have the game uncracked would be the interesting number, not the number of days you may remain uncracked.

Also, where did Microsoft get their numbers from when they say half the sales can be lost? Well, from the publishers seeing as the text you quoted says so, but where did the publishers get those numbers from?

 

[microhive]

I fully agree with the OP. I actually regret buying spore when I actually could get it for free and with unlimited amount of installations without much trouble. The game wasn't all that fun anyway(Cell stage was fun).

Single player games are doomed to be pirated.

I'm not a guy who likes to pirate games which are available to me but EA takes things to the extreme.

 

[Skrapt]

You lot all whinge about DRM, but I bet many of you have pirated games.

It is hypocritical of you, and just reinforces the fact that new ways to stop pirates need to be found. It is illegal, you are hurting peoples livelihoods, and you should be prosecuted.

Stop bitching about DRM, and stop being part of the problem.

Actually the only game I've ever pirated was the 2nd Monkey Island game and only because wherever I looked it wasn't available to purchase or it was at extremely high prices that the original developers would never have seen a penny of anyway.

Its your kind of mentality that is seriously making me think about pirating games, when a game with intrusive DRM is released even if I would thoroughly enjoy that game I refuse to buy it (Spore, Mass Effect, Bioshock and a few others with SecuROM are all titles I hope to play someday without the intrusive DRM and so far piracy is the only thing giving me that option). Treating paying customers as pirates is a self fulfilling prophecy because you will turn them into pirates. The Pirates however will be happy with their version of the game on numerous machines with no hoops to jump through and will remain pirates thanks to all the DRM you slapped on your game.

 

[Carra]

The idea of DRM isn't to prevent anyone from copying your game anymore. Eventually it will happen, the idea is to delay it.

Scenario 1, worst case:
-Game is released on the internet a week in advance of its retail date. Horror! Even people who didn't plan to pirate it might just download it or get it from a friend. And maybe even "forget" to buy the real version.
Scenario 2, the usual:
-Game is released on the internet on release day or a few days after. Pirates will go and pirate it, the rest will just buy it.
Senario 3, the good case:
-Game is only cracked two months after the retail hits the stores. Bingo! Even (some of) those pirates will now go and buy our game. After all, they can't wait forever if they want to play it.
Scenario 4, Publishers wet dream:
-Game never gets cracked! Yeah, like that's ever gonna happen. Even mmorpgs like WoW have a whole series of private servers.

 

[Skrapt]

@ Carra
The problem is that DRM doesn't even affect scenario 1. Pre release material gets around not because of a lack of DRM it happens because the disc happened to pass through someones hands that decided to leak it.

The other slight problem is the Scenario 4 is impossible and scenario 3 would only happen 0.01% of the time and only ever with some really really intrusive DRM.

The facts of the matter is this:
People who want to pay for your game, will pay.
People who want your game and don't want to pay, will pirate.
Piracy cannot be stopped and by trying all you do is alienate paying customers and keep it off the torrents for a few more hours.

People pirate things for many different reasons however the huge problem here is that most of the reasons for piracy can be traced back to companies trying to prevent it. For example, a lot of games/films have delayed releases around the world sometimes this is because of translations but a lot of the time it is because publishers want to delay the release of content in areas with high piracy rates or where a lot of release originate from the problem with this is a LOT of people pirate for the reason "The game isn't available where I live or it's available but costs 5 times as much as in the country next to us".

 

[Carra]

Yes, scenario 3 is only possible with very intrusive DRM (think Bioshock) which will also loose you some customers. But it might also win you some pirates who are tired of waiting.

And I agree: not having world wide releases on the same day is a dumb thing to do. Not only a games thing, it's the same with movies and tv series. If people have to wait half a year to see the new lost episode in their own country or just download it, why wait? For movies, it's only possible to make a world wide release if you're a rich publisher. Smaller movie companies just don't have the money to do it nor do they know if a movie will be a hit. For series however, it boggles me why they don't do it. The actors of Heroes were all recognised when they went to China, even before it was released there. That should send alarm bells to the companies. If people could see it on their own tvs without waiting, not many people would download it. Or maybe the percentage of the public that understands enough English to watch a series in those countries is neglible.

 

[DaruneAlbane]

If you look at the time line of the music industry when they have high piracy rates with the old Napster their music was selling at extremely HIGH volumes then after they sued it to death their sales dropped like a rock. i see a link there

and to further reply on the whole thing .. lack of sales of a game does not mean that it was stolen .. it just means that people downloaded the game and it was not WORTH buying. many times i have downloaded a game .. played it and then deleted it other times i went out and picked up a legit copy to help support that company.

 

[Skrapt]

If you look at the time line of the music industry when they have high piracy rates with the old Napster their music was selling at extremely HIGH volumes then after they sued it to death their sales dropped like a rock. i see a link there

there's quite a bit of evidence to support that pirates generally buy more music then honest consumers, it's some of the only evidence that's objective too as all studies that have pointed towards the opposite conclusions have been exclusively sponsored by music companies. Of course there's no real answer to that question however there is no doubt that the hard line the music industry has taken has reduced their sales on top of their reduced sales from competition with the new entertainment medium (gaming).

 

[TheBluesader]

He's right, but at the same time, this isn't a grand revelation. And I think the management folks working for the Big Boys know he's right. The problem is, they're publicly traded, and the old guys in ties who give them money don't know nufum bout these kids and their computin' machines. They want the products they invest in "protected", so that when the "protection" is compromised, they can cry piracy and try to get sentences increased. It's just your typical "business with old stupids" at work again.

So tell the investors that its protected by copy protection "at least as good as SecuROM", and pocket the money...

I know that's what I would do.

 

[paketep]

DRM is stupid. So are publishers.

 

[Arbre]

And DRMs do work to some degree. Otherwise piracy would be even worse, no?
Obviously, the easier the piracy, the more there is, and the more tempting it is.
It's almost a principle.

Not really, no.
As stated in the article, you only need one person to crack the game, everything else is just filesharing. The strength of the DRM only slows down ONE person, not the whole field.

This is article is stating something that is absolutely nothing new at all.
However, no matter how cracked, a console like the PS2 required you to bring physical modifications to its structure, and in many cases, a booting disc.
The Wii also needs a physical modification, but Nintendo clearly doesn't make much efforts. They really don't care.
For the PSP, you have to go through a manipulation of the system, it's all electronic, it has been a bit more complicated and even quite risky for some time, and it was a defense clearly drawing a line between those who were hardcore consumers of illegal copies, and those who hesitated. Now, globally, such a defense system is clearly porous, but it's a defense in that many people don't even bother with that. They just don't want to, for various reasons.
It's rather clear that if there were zero defenses at all, piracy would be greatly encouraged, favoured and made accessible to an even greater number of people.
What you're saying is that it's just as good as if console manufacturers sold their consoles with no protection whatsoever.
That's bull.

 

[Skrapt]

This is article is stating something that is absolutely nothing new at all.
However, no matter how cracked, a console like the PS2 required you to bring physical modifications to its structure, and in many cases, a booting disc.
The Wii also needs a physical modification, but Nintendo clearly doesn't make much efforts. They really don't care.
For the PSP, you have to go through a manipulation of the system, it's all electronic, it has been a bit more complicated and even quite risky for some time, and it was a defense clearly drawing a line between those who were hardcore consumers of illegal copies, and those who hesitated. Now, globally, such a defense system is clearly porous, but it's a defense in that many people don't even bother with that. They just don't want to, for various reasons.
It's rather clear that if there were zero defenses at all, piracy would be greatly encouraged, favoured and made accessible to an even greater number of people.
What you're saying is that it's just as good as if console manufacturers sold their consoles with no protection whatsoever.
That's bull.

You're making the assumption that the protection put into place on consoles limits their piracy to the 'hardcore' who would pirate no matter what and deters the more 'casual', which simply isn't true. Again all it takes is one person to create a chip and know how to install it for it to become widespread and unlike the PC pirates directly profit from consoles. Console piracy is pretty mainstream, especially for previous generation hardware such as the PS2/PS1/Xbox/Wii and there are plenty of people around willing to chip them for you and sell you copied games for a couple of quid.

If you compared the no. of PC's owned to the piracy rate and no. of consoles owned to piracy rate those figures would probably be extremely similar.

 

[Arbre]

This is article is stating something that is absolutely nothing new at all.
However, no matter how cracked, a console like the PS2 required you to bring physical modifications to its structure, and in many cases, a booting disc.
The Wii also needs a physical modification, but Nintendo clearly doesn't make much efforts. They really don't care.
For the PSP, you have to go through a manipulation of the system, it's all electronic, it has been a bit more complicated and even quite risky for some time, and it was a defense clearly drawing a line between those who were hardcore consumers of illegal copies, and those who hesitated. Now, globally, such a defense system is clearly porous, but it's a defense in that many people don't even bother with that. They just don't want to, for various reasons.
It's rather clear that if there were zero defenses at all, piracy would be greatly encouraged, favoured and made accessible to an even greater number of people.
What you're saying is that it's just as good as if console manufacturers sold their consoles with no protection whatsoever.
That's bull.

You're making the assumption that the protection put into place on consoles limits their piracy to the 'hardcore' who would pirate no matter what and deters the more 'casual', which simply isn't true.

Please tell me how this is an assumption, and not just plain logic.

Again all it takes is one person to create a chip and know how to install it for it to become widespread and unlike the PC pirates directly profit from consoles.

Unless you didn't notice, chips don't come with the default rig.
I've seen ladies in their fifties come to me and talk about things they heard on how to get games without paying, but it was all hearsay to them and didn't know what they were talking about exactly. When I went technical, from their perspective mind you, they just waved hands and didn't bother.

Console piracy is pretty mainstream, especially for previous generation hardware such as the PS2/PS1/Xbox/Wii and there are plenty of people around willing to chip them for you and sell you copied games for a couple of quid.

I'm afraid you're not getting it. The very fact that people have to pay, put chips or do something else to allow piracy on their consoles, by the cold and hard rules of logic, means the piracy market is limited in light of what it would be if there were no protections at all on consoles.
The very fact that some people still buy games instead of tapping into this supposedly mainstream piracy pool rather clearly tells you that the protections do have a deterent effect, although limited.
An industry with no protection at all would likely be an industry with no game sales.
Even the last die hard buyers would know soon or later that "everybody" gets their game for free and it's just as easy as saying hello.
This is not the reality though.

If you compared the no. of PC's owned to the piracy rate and no. of consoles owned to piracy rate those figures would probably be extremely similar.

Probably? Like "I'm going to make stuff up but please take my word for it anyway"?

 

[Sewblon]

Somebody, for the love of God, print this out and staple it to the head of EA's CEO.

Don't worry, he will find out when his company goes bankrupt.

 

[Syntax Error]

Reminds me of the Spyro article at GamaSutra. In it, the people at Insomniac learned from the Spyro 2 issues (it being pirated the day it came out, rendering the sales figures of the game to plummet severely). For Spyro 3, they made it in such a way that the copy-protection is very hard to crack. It took hackers two months to fully crack the game (according to them, these two months after game's release is the most important. The hackers ended up thanking them for putting up such a challenge.

The full article can be read here [http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20011017/dodd_01.htm].

Moral of the story, you can't stop pirates, so it would be better to be able to delay them just a bit.