Your DRM choice

[Nooners]

We complain about DRM a lot here. So let's role-play, or brainstorm. Maybe we'll come up with some interesting new idea.

You're a AAA game development/publishment company working on a big game that will include offline single-player and online multiplayer. While you want to release your game without any form of DRM, your supervisors demand it be included in some form. What do you choose for your game's DRM, and why?

And work within the limits I've provided. You can't quit your job in protest, and you can't convince your bosses to not have DRM for the game.

EDIT: Should've answered my own question. And yes, this is primarily a PC question since this is where most DRM controversy stems from.
I personally would run it through Steam. Works offline, and is a good online service too. Simple for me.

 

[Daft Time]

We complain about DRM a lot here. So let's role-play, or brainstorm. Maybe we'll come up with some interesting new idea.

You're a AAA game development/publishment company working on a big game that will include offline single-player and online multiplayer. While you want to release your game without any form of DRM, your supervisors demand it be included in some form. What do you choose for your game's DRM, and why?

And work within the limits I've provided. You can't quit your job in protest, and you can't convince your bosses to not have DRM for the game.

On console, there is DRM required to release a game on the system and inbuilt to the console itself. Just releasing a game there means I don't have to actually have to do much than what is already required to meet your criteria. The issue is really when we get to the PC. While to play a pirated game of the Xbox or a PS3 you need to crack the system itself, the PC has no such limitation. CD Keys are relatively unobtrusive for physical copies, so I'll go with that. For digital distribution I begrudgingly just use Steam. I'd have liked to release it on GOG but there are worse things than Steam. Ta da!

EDIT - When I saw I'd like to have released it on GOG, I mean as well as GOG. It's just not practical to not use Steam if you're developing for the PC. You lose so much of your market that doesn't want to use anything but Steam. I feel the choice is important though.

OP; answer the question yourself. Don't be lazy!

 

[Requia]

On console, there is DRM required to release a game on the system and inbuilt to the console itself.

This exactly (unless we';re talking about DLC, which is awful). It's effective enough to actually dampen piracy, but aside from no backups console DRM never interferes with playing the game or selling it when I'm done.

 

[Sir Christopher McFarlane]

I would only have an on-line pass for the multi-player mode and let the single-player work off-line without restrictions.

 

[Daft Time]

On console, there is DRM required to release a game on the system and inbuilt to the console itself.

This exactly (unless we';re talking about DLC, which is awful). It's effective enough to actually dampen piracy, but aside from no backups console DRM never interferes with playing the game or selling it when I'm done.

Yeah, the bare minimum on consoles is extremely effective. As much as I prefer my PC, it is my favourite argument for their continued existence. Limiting the hardware provides a pretty safe environment for the developer where the PC is basically just the honour policy. The most effective way to curb piracy on the PC is to get the player base to like you as a company, and to make it easy to get the game legally. I just wish companies understood that. Maybe I'd play more than a handful of games a year if they did.

 

[DoPo]

I think encryption works just fine.

Encryption? How do you mean to apply it exactly?

OT: One time online verification/registration. And/or (probably or) key activation method. Also available on Steam for increased exposure and an alternative distribution.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

I like those quirky DRMs that restrict gameplay in some obscure but vital way. Like with Arkham Asylym or that Sim Game Developer one that came out recently.

The best was in the Way Back When, there was a space shuttle sim game that if you got the lookup code (Page 13, Paragraph 5, third word) wrong it forced you to go through the 3 real world days it took do run down the checklist before you could take off.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

I personally would run it through Steam. Works offline, and is a good online service too. Simple for me.

Yeah, I would go through this option.
It's the lesser of MANY evils, and allows users to install their games on multiple computers with no issue.

I would only have an on-line pass for the multi-player mode and let the single-player work off-line without restrictions.

I'd say this works in theory, but what would you do about LAN-play? (Also nice Jinrui avatar BTW)

 

[Doom-Slayer]

-snip-

DRM by itself is annoying, and therefore I want developers/publishers to balance it by giving me something in return. That in a nutshell is why I and a lot of people like Steam. Yes, its still DRM but we get sales, we get achievements, chat, ability to take screen-shots etc in return, and especially the ability to buy games extremely cheap. Its a compromise, and to me, a very good compromise, it might not be for some, but I happen to like it.

 

[Sir Christopher McFarlane]

I would only have an on-line pass for the multi-player mode and let the single-player work off-line without restrictions.

I'd say this works in theory, but what would you do about LAN-play? (Also nice Jinrui avatar BTW)

I love the avatar too. I don't know what I'd do. Again, I'm only including DRM at all because I'm forced to. I don't care if it works against piracy well or not. As long as people can still play them. I probably would have more ideas if I ever played multi-player.

 

[kingthrall]

id have the online drm only available for the Special ediiton releases. If Reg players wanted the DRM included then they can purchases the extra content through a pass.

 

[Daft Time]

Server Architecture (AKA Always Online)

Why?

Spoiler

Because it just fucking works.

I think it's worth remembering 80% of statistics are made up. There's no reliable way of measuring the piracy rate of the game, and any statistic is just a remember of, at best, educated guesses. It's also worth noting that consumers frown upon "always online" requirements, and only titles which already had a big following have managed to succeed using it. If I remember correctly, there is also a working server emulator for Diablo 3 now.

EDIT -

I was actually curious about the statistics, so I tracked down an interview where the Witcher II statistics were explained. It's apparently extrapolated from the number of peers listed by a torrent aggregate site and then some mathematics based some not unreasonable estimates. It's much better than I thought it would be, all things considered. I'd wager the number is much less than the estimate, but it's not bad all the same. The Diablo III number is all bull shit though.

Furthermore, always online (it's not called server architecture by the way, that image just states that Diablo 3 used the Battle.net server architecture for the always online component) requires a significant amount of money to run. You have to hire people to maintain it, the servers themselves, additional customer service, extra bug testing before release - it's a very resource intensive solution to the problem. I'll hazard a guess that without the auction house Blizzard would not have picked this route for a non-subscription game even with the limited risk of piracy. It's certainly not worth it for any company without hordes of money in the first place to implement.

 

[RikuoAmero]

Server Architecture (AKA Always Online)

Why?

Spoiler

Because it just fucking works.

And I was one of those people who bought Witcher 2, full price, on release day, because it DIDN'T have DRM. Whereas Diablo III? Haven't touched it.

 

[Yopaz]

I have to go with Steam here. I actually prefer that to no DRM because of the ease of downloading, installing and filling in keys (rarely needed, but convenient when it is needed).

The problem is that there's usually something on top of Steam activation... Games For Windows Live actually ruined Batman Arkham City for me since it deleted my fucking save game. If Origins have Games for Windows live I am getting the Wii U version rather than the PC version.

 

[Something Amyss]

This exactly (unless we';re talking about DLC, which is awful). It's effective enough to actually dampen piracy, but aside from no backups console DRM never interferes with playing the game or selling it when I'm done.

there seems to be more than enough piracy on consoles if Microsoft can ban millions each holiday season.

 

[Baneat]

They'll never practically get the online component of the game to work anyway so that'd be DRM enough. so that and a CD key. The best DRM was the one that came with the helicopter game that took 30 minutes then the screen became all out of focus and blurry etc. The reason it was effective (Nobody's cracked it to this day) is because it's really difficult to test if your crack attempt worked when you have to wait so long for the effects to kick in.

 

[Something Amyss]

Because it just fucking works.

It really does look good compared to completely made up numbers the developers used.