Xbox One DRM Won't Deter Witcher 3 Studio

[Andy Chalk]

Xbox One DRM Won't Deter Witcher 3 Studio

CD Projekt co-founder Marcin Iwiński said it's up to gamers to decide which platform they want to support - and whose rules they're willing to live with.

CD Projekt is well known for its unwavering stance against DRM, which it has said several times in the past is ineffective and serves only to alienate legitimate customers. It's a position that might appear to put the studio at odds with Microsoft, whose Xbox One console has some pretty arcane restrictions on game sharing and preowned sales, but Iwiński said that no matter how it worked out, the studio won't step away from the platform.

"We have not received anything from Microsoft until today on [DRM policies] and, before we form any definite opinions here, we would like to have this process explained in details by the platform holder," he told Eurogamer. "Having said that, we strongly believe in the freedom of choice and voting with your wallet. I would disagree that it would do any good if we decided to abandon one of the platforms, especially when we have the capacity to create games for it."

Iwiński said that while CD Projekt has no influence on Microsoft's DRM policies, consumers have a choice about which company and console they support. "I am sure that a lot of gamers will choose one of the consoles for its convenience and easiness of use - that's fine, and by doing so they will agree to whatever rules the platform holder will impose," he continued. "What I can, however, guarantee here and now, is that if you want the 100 percent DRM-free experience you will have it on the PC, the platform where we set the rules for our games."

CD Projekt's latest game, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, is in development now for the Xbox One, PlayStation 4 and PC, and will come out sometime in 2014.

Source: Eurogamer [http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-06-11-staunchly-anti-drm-witcher-3-dev-cd-projekt-responds-to-xbox-one-policy-concerns]


Permalink

 

[Roofstone]

Gotta love these guys, they've always been rather smart about all of this. Earned them some good PR every now and then.

 

[GAunderrated]

Can't argue with the logic. If you don't want to support xbox one crap DRM then buy it on one of the many other choices. I personally will PC this game to hell

 

[Moeez]

Aren't they the co-creators of GOG (Good Old Games), the major DRM-free digital games service?

One of my new favourite developers.

 

[TiberiusEsuriens]

I like the statement behind the statement. "Don't get mad at developers for their support of getting their games out. Just buy it how you want to play it."

 

[AJey]

Then they should not cry when game gets pirated again.

 

[Trishbot]

Xbox One DRM won't deter Witcher 2 developers.

... But it will deter me from the Xbox One version of their game.

Points for Sony, then, at least. Glad they didn't stick it on just that one system.

 

[HyenaThePirate]

Can't argue with the logic. If you don't want to support xbox one crap DRM then buy it on one of the many other choices. I personally will PC this game to hell

This, except minus the "crap" portion of the comment.

Frankly, I don't see why this is a big deal or issue. For those of us who care more about games than about how companies keep people from stealing them, the Xbox One has few flaws. I like the system, I like what it's trying to do, and I'm a grown man who will own BOTH systems and have a great PC. I have internet and that argument crying about "Oh wooooe! What if you don't have internet access?!? Logging in on a daily basis to verify my game's license! That's draconian booo hoo!"

Really??? Xbox is the go to system for most FPS gamers that want to play multiplayer games. That's not disputed. So who is it that doesn't have a reliable enough internet connection to allow their xbox to access it once a day? If you live in NORTH AMERICA or the WESTERN hemisphere, very, very few people can lodge this complaint. Nowadays this is life as we know it, step into the future. Always connected, wifi-plugged in.. this is the future of EVERYTHING.

And if you don't like it, buy a PS4. Or a PC. You've got options! Don't get mad because OTHER people don't agree with YOUR choices.

And let's not forget SONY's less than stellar history in regards to DRM combat. ROOT KIT anyone?? Do you think that if the Xbox pulls off what Microsoft is attempting to do that Sony won't follow suit immediately? And the developers are rightly so keeping their mouths shut about it because at the end of the day they know it means MORE profit for them, less for Gamestop and used games stores, which might be of tremendous delight and benefit to us broke-ass consumers, but are essentially leeches to developers that really would prefer their games to be bought at full price and to be compensated for each used sale.
If Gamestop didn't want this to happen, they should have voluntarily came up with a way to ensure developers got their cut of the resell pie. All the semantical arguments about "this is my game I bought it so I can sell it for whatever I want to whom I want Nyaaaah" sounds adorably quaint but it's a one-sided (and rather limited) perspective, considering apart from the initial money we paid for the game's purchase we had little involvement with its creation, and even less impact on its success.

 

[NKRevan]

Then they should not cry when game gets pirated again.

This is why we can't have nice things. -.-

 

[PoolCleaningRobot]

Can't argue with the logic. If you don't want to support xbox one crap DRM then buy it on one of the many other choices. I personally will PC this game to hell

This, except minus the "crap" portion of the comment.

Frankly, I don't see why this is a big deal or issue. For those of us who care more about games than about how companies keep people from stealing them, the Xbox One has few flaws. I like the system, I like what it's trying to do, and I'm a grown man who will own BOTH systems and have a great PC. I have internet and that argument crying about "Oh wooooe! What if you don't have internet access?!? Logging in on a daily basis to verify my game's license! That's draconian booo hoo!"

Really??? Xbox is the go to system for most FPS gamers that want to play multiplayer games. That's not disputed. So who is it that doesn't have a reliable enough internet connection to allow their xbox to access it once a day? If you live in NORTH AMERICA or the WESTERN hemisphere, very, very few people can lodge this complaint. Nowadays this is life as we know it, step into the future. Always connected, wifi-plugged in.. this is the future of EVERYTHING.

And if you don't like it, buy a PS4. Or a PC. You've got options! Don't get mad because OTHER people don't agree with YOUR choices.

And let's not forget SONY's less than stellar history in regards to DRM combat. ROOT KIT anyone?? Do you think that if the Xbox pulls off what Microsoft is attempting to do that Sony won't follow suit immediately? And the developers are rightly so keeping their mouths shut about it because at the end of the day they know it means MORE profit for them, less for Gamestop and used games stores, which might be of tremendous delight and benefit to us broke-ass consumers, but are essentially leeches to developers that really would prefer their games to be bought at full price and to be compensated for each used sale.
If Gamestop didn't want this to happen, they should have voluntarily came up with a way to ensure developers got their cut of the resell pie. All the semantical arguments about "this is my game I bought it so I can sell it for whatever I want to whom I want Nyaaaah" sounds adorably quaint but it's a one-sided (and rather limited) perspective, considering apart from the initial money we paid for the game's purchase we had little involvement with its creation, and even less impact on its success.

Seriously bro? I won't judge anyone who wants to buy an XB1 but how can you justify them adding restrictions to when you can play? How do I know I won't get hit by a hurricane tomorrow and lose my internet connection for 2 weeks. Am I just supposed to deal with it because god forbid I get in the way of multi-million dollar corporations making even more money off of me. You complain about gamers crying "boo hoo"? What about the publishers in tears because "Boo hoo, my game only sold 8 million copies instead of 20 million like Call of Dudy. It must be because of used game sales and not because I'm charging $60 for a game people clearly want but don't want to pay that much for. If only there was a way I sell my games cheaper in a form they couldn't resell like digital copies. But that would mean I have charge less!" I accept that the way dev's and publishers make money off of games is completely different than say cars, but that doesn't mean I should have to give up my rights to do whatever I want to my copy of a game because a publisher's swimming pool of money has gotten a little low

And maybe you need a refresher on Sony's future drm and game sharing policy: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.410247-PlayStation-4-Game-Sharing-This-Is-How-Its-Done

If publishers want my money, they should make more incentives for me to buy their shit. Not curb stomp my freaking rights to own and play a game I paid for. And you're right, I have options so I'll be buying a ps4 and if that goes down the shitter in the next few months then I'll only game through Steam or GoG

 

[mateushac]

How can CDPR be such a "good guy" company? It's amazing how reasonable and chill their every statement sounds.

BTW, I completely support what they're trying to say there. The choice is always up to the customer, we're not forced to buy anything we don't like.

 

[BloodSquirrel]

"CD Projekt is well known for its unwavering stance against DRM"

Except when they put DRM in The Witcher 2. Which was kind of a blessing, I guess, because I didn't buy it until much later at a lower price point after they had removed the DRM. And found out that it was awful, and not worth $60.

 

[mateushac]

"CD Projekt is well known for its unwavering stance against DRM"

Except when they put DRM in The Witcher 2. Which was kind of a blessing, I guess, because I didn't buy it until much later at a lower price point after they had removed the DRM. And found out that it was awful, and not worth $60.

It's been quite a while, but from what I remember TW2 was DRM-free from day one (after a patch, if I remember correctly) on GOG and Steam (except for steam's own drm, of course). If it wasn't from day one, it was removed within a week or two.

EDIT:

[Quote from Wikipedia]

"On April 14, 2011, CD Projekt RED announced during their CDP Days 2011 Spring Conference that retail copies of the game would feature SecuRom DRM. However, the protection would still allow for infinite installations on an infinite number of PCs, with the ability to play on up to five PCs at any one time. It was also confirmed that the game would feature no censorship between regions.[11] The Witcher 2 was also distributed through several digital distribution services such as Steam and CD Projekt RED's own service GOG.com. The version sold on GOG.com was the only version that did not have any DRM at release."

"At launch, many critics and gamers complained about activation problems, registration issues, and performance on high-end systems with both Nvidia and AMD cards. The 1.1 patch of the game also resolves some of the above noted issues.[15]
Note that patch 1.1 removes the DRM.[16] Tech Spot claimed, based on user reports, that the DRM on the retail version of The Witcher 2 drastically reduced frame rates and increased load times.[17] Patch 1.1 reportedly increased frame rate simply by removing the DRM.[17] The release notes indicated that the "Game now runs 5-30% more efficiently and game loading has been accelerated. Efficiency increases will vary depending on system configuration and game version."[17] The release notes also stated that owners of the boxed versions of the game would notice the most significant improvements.[17]"

Please note that the patch that removed the DRM from all non-GOG.com versions of the game was released within 9 days of the game's release.

 

[neppakyo]

"CD Projekt is well known for its unwavering stance against DRM"

Except when they put DRM in The Witcher 2. Which was kind of a blessing, I guess, because I didn't buy it until much later at a lower price point after they had removed the DRM. And found out that it was awful, and not worth $60.

It was DRM free from day one. The publisher enforced it(retail discs), CDPR removed it with a patch not very long after release. GoG.com version was DRM free from the get go.

 

[nevarran]

I dont think CD Projeckt ever cried about their games getting pirated, in fact I think they said a while back that they would like people to play it first and formost, and if they enjoy it then to support the developer so they can make more games.

They did, a while back. They were talking about how their game was downloaded a lot from torrents. No one's perfect.
But I think actions speak louder than words. And so far CDPR is acting good.

 

[BloodSquirrel]

It's been quite a while, but from what I remember TW2 was DRM-free from day one (after a patch, if I remember correctly) on GOG and Steam (except for steam's own drm, of course). If it wasn't from day one, it was removed within a week or two.

EDIT:

[Quote from Wikipedia]

"On April 14, 2011, CD Projekt RED announced during their CDP Days 2011 Spring Conference that retail copies of the game would feature SecuRom DRM. However, the protection would still allow for infinite installations on an infinite number of PCs, with the ability to play on up to five PCs at any one time. It was also confirmed that the game would feature no censorship between regions.[11] The Witcher 2 was also distributed through several digital distribution services such as Steam and CD Projekt RED's own service GOG.com. The version sold on GOG.com was the only version that did not have any DRM at release."

"At launch, many critics and gamers complained about activation problems, registration issues, and performance on high-end systems with both Nvidia and AMD cards. The 1.1 patch of the game also resolves some of the above noted issues.[15]
Note that patch 1.1 removes the DRM.[16] Tech Spot claimed, based on user reports, that the DRM on the retail version of The Witcher 2 drastically reduced frame rates and increased load times.[17] Patch 1.1 reportedly increased frame rate simply by removing the DRM.[17] The release notes indicated that the "Game now runs 5-30% more efficiently and game loading has been accelerated. Efficiency increases will vary depending on system configuration and game version."[17] The release notes also stated that owners of the boxed versions of the game would notice the most significant improvements.[17]"

Please note that the patch that removed the DRM from all non-GOG.com versions of the game was released within 9 days of the game's release.

DRM which you have to install a patch to get rid of is still DRM. Patching is even more trouble than a normal authentication would have been in the first place.

"A little better than other companies about DRM, sometimes" is not an "unwavering stance".

 

[mateushac]

snip

DRM which you have to install a patch to get rid of is still DRM. Patching is even more trouble than a normal authentication would have been in the first place.

"A little better than other companies about DRM, sometimes" is not an "unwavering stance".

You see, there's always been DRM-free versions of TW2 for sale. The issues they had with Steam were obvious and the DRM on physical copies was enforced by the publishers (okay, you might not be willing to believe this, but it was their official stance since before release). Even if you believe the whole DRM on physical copies thing was intentional, you still had GOG.com supplying DRM-free digital copies from day one. Maybe they were trying to encourage digital sales instead of retail, but who's to blame them for playing business to their advantage?

Also, you should patch a game sometime. You'll see that it may be quite easy.