The Impossible DRM

[Shamus Young]

The Impossible DRM

Publishers don't seem to realize that effective DRM is not just difficult, it's flat-out impossible.

Read Full Article

 

[fenrizz]

Brilliant post. I've been thinking the same ting for a while now, but you've written it better than i ever could.
keep it up

 

[Nimbus]

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

 

[DeadlyYellow]

It's all well and good to plight against DRM, but it seems more and more that any computer game will see more piracy rather than legitimate sales. DRM didn't stop Spore from being massively pirated, nor did lack of it stop World of Goo from a similar fate.

 

[zoozilla]

Definitely agree with all your points.

DRM is hopelessly hopeless, as are the companies that use them. Of course, that's why companies like GOG.com need to be supported - game publishers need to understand that a game that has no DRM can still sell very well.

 

[Doug]

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

You're making the fatal error of assuming the EA bosses are capable of reading.

And I think everyone knows DRM is a huge pile of horse droppings that only horse whips the customers for doing the right thing.

 

[DeathSquire36]

Brilliant article. Pretty much sums up how I've felt about DRM ever since it started becoming an issue. You will never, EVER stop people from pirating games. It simply won't happen. In fact, in regards to your mention of Spore, it was actually pirated much more massively than it would have been had it had no DRM at all. The piraters simply saw the overwhelming DRM as a challenge, and TRIED to make it the most pirated game ever. I'm pretty sure they succeeded.

Moral of the story: this exact article. DRM will never work, so learn from Stardock Games (Galactic Civilizations, as mentioned, has no DRM) and quit harming legal paying customers with obtrusive software.

 

[Skrapt]

I agree completely, what publishers/developers don't get is that their only efforts that will have any effect on the piracy rate will be how good they made the game. And since making a crap game and going 'aha! We beat the pirates because no one wants our game!" is a bad business model they have to suck it up and find ways of turning pirates into consumers instead of turning consumers into pirates.

The idea is to make someone like you/your game enough for them to pay for it, not force pirates to pay for it through lawsuits as you just lost a lot of potential customers through bad PR. Whether you think piracy is stealing or not the pirates are a market segment that are simply difficult to please and most of the time they do have money in pocket and are willing to spend it or put up with other revenue streams (advertising) to get what they want.

To compete with piracy you need an easy to use, fast delivery service where all content is available to everyone at FAIR prices without any form of DRM or program that what you've bought must be tied to.

I accept that the above service isn't what the corporations want as it doesn't eliminate piracy as SecuROM and the like claim to, but the fact is it would turn a sizable chunk of potential pirates into customers - especially if your service is well advertised/supported and well known to the general consumer base.

 

[Doug]

Moral of the story: this exact article. DRM will never work, so learn from Stardock Games and quit harming legal paying customers with obtrusive software.

Agreed. Too bad EA won't accept reality.

 

[Doug]

Also, the more I think about it, the less likely EA will want to accept it. They've invested crap loads into SecuRom, and to simply abandon the product because its worthless would effectively say to EA bosses "Our tech guys lied too us", the EA shareholders "The EA bosses lied too us/are stupid" and to the share market "Flee! FLEEEEEEEE! FLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!"

 

[GoldenShadow]

Out of those 3 games you don't want to buy, Bioshock, Mass Effect and Spore, the only one that truly must be played is Bioshock. Mass Effect is ok, and Spore is a horrible game after the cell stage.

 

[Doug]

Out of those 3 games you don't want to buy, Bioshock, Mass Effect and Spore, the only one that truly must be played is Bioshock. Mass Effect is ok, and Spore is a horrible game after the cell stage.

Bioshock was very 'meh' for me, whilst Mass Effect was alot of fun!

 

[dragontiers]

This is probably one of the best written articles I've actually read in a long time (not that some of the others aren't good). One question I've got that wasn't addressed (probably because of lack of information): What about concepts like OnLive. Wouldn't these services stop piracy? It's my understanding the actual "game" is on a server somewhere else and is streamed to you as you play, much the same way MMO's are. In addition to it's other benefits (less hardware requirements, no disks etc. to lose/break, possiblility of cheaper prices/better quality control), this would seem to be a possible solution. I'm no expert on the matter, however, so feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken about something.

 

[Nimbus]

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

You're making the fatal error of assuming the EA bosses are capable of reading.

And I think everyone knows DRM is a huge pile of horse droppings that only horse whips the customers for doing the right thing.

How about a poison-tipped staple? Maybe his replacement will be able to read. (This is assuming that to become the CEO of EA you must eat your predecessor...)

 

[Doug]

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

You're making the fatal error of assuming the EA bosses are capable of reading.

And I think everyone knows DRM is a huge pile of horse droppings that only horse whips the customers for doing the right thing.

How about a poison-tipped staple? Maybe his replacement will be able to read. (This is assuming that to become the CEO of EA you must eat your predecessor...)

Sadly, the poison would eventually reach non-toxic levels, rendering the surviving EA CEO semi immune to future poisons.

 

[Nimbus]

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

You're making the fatal error of assuming the EA bosses are capable of reading.

And I think everyone knows DRM is a huge pile of horse droppings that only horse whips the customers for doing the right thing.

How about a poison-tipped staple? Maybe his replacement will be able to read. (This is assuming that to become the CEO of EA you must eat your predecessor...)

Sadly, the poison would eventually reach non-toxic levels, rendering the surviving EA CEO semi immune to future poisons.

Hmm, good point...

I've got it! We use a giant staple, made entirely out of Selenium!

 

[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.

If you're paying attention, this is why the Big Boys want to find ways of going all-online as soon as they can manage it. That way they can protect everything with, as he said in the post, a simple login.

 

[SatansBestBuddy]

This needs to be read.

This is one of thoase articals that needs to reach such a critical level that people will say, "But Shamus said..." in every conversation about DRM ever from now on.

 

[Kojiro ftt]

This is probably one of the best written articles I've actually read in a long time (not that some of the others aren't good). One question I've got that wasn't addressed (probably because of lack of information): What about concepts like OnLive. Wouldn't these services stop piracy? It's my understanding the actual "game" is on a server somewhere else and is streamed to you as you play, much the same way MMO's are. In addition to it's other benefits (less hardware requirements, no disks etc. to lose/break, possiblility of cheaper prices/better quality control), this would seem to be a possible solution. I'm no expert on the matter, however, so feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken about something.

You are entirely correct, and that is one of the many reasons developers/publishers are behind the idea of OnLive. However, I think the technological barriers of a service like OnLive are nearly as impossible as DRM.

 

[Veylon]

DRM exists because of ass-covering. If some manager takes out DRM and they have 20,000 pirates, they get blamed for it. If they leave it in, they get the same 20,000 pirates, but no blame because they did everything they could. Not terribly sensible, but very bureaucratic.