Anti piracy in PC games?

[Silvanus]

One flaw with your "Devil's Advocacy". Libraries do not simply loan out and recirculate retail books. They buy "Library Editions". Essentially they are paying well above market value for the single book, in order to purchase a "multi user" license. So a &12.99 retail hardcover may cost a library $50. This is why the lost book fees at libraries are so expensive. And yes, before anyone jumps all over me, there are some exceptions to this licensing for libraries. Typically involving out of print items and some types of periodicals.

True. From consumer's standpoint, however, it's functionally identical for one to borrow that Library Edition or to download a PDF of the text. Each additional reading of that expensive edition still yields no additional revenue.

Plus, some libraries even carry games, and I don't believe those are "library edition" games.

In a gaming medium the equivalent to traditional Libraries will be Streaming Services. Things like Playstation Now (I think it's called?) or any "Netflix Like" service for gaming where you pay a flat subscription price to access a catalog of games. The games streamed by that service are purchased and licensed specifically for multi users.

Libraries are free, though, whereas subscriptions to streaming services are not.

Quite. It's the choice of the end user what to do with their copy. But I meant that as a practical statement in regards to the retail exploitation of the used market to line the pockets of retailers rather than creators.

If the copies weren't limited, there would be no second hand market.

I don't agree with this at all.

Even if there were enough copies of a game for everyone on earth, the price would stay the same, because the retailers and publishers would keep it high. And as long as the price is high, people will buy second-hand, because the primary reason for doing so is price.

My point, if I had one, is that the concept of resale does not apply the same way to digital. And without the physical distribution factor, there shouldn't be any obstacle to make everything available for all, in their own marketplace at adjusted prices.

But there is, because it still needs to compete with retail and it's used market. The digital market is limited by the pricing and terms of the retail market.

One might see that as a good thing. If second-hand copies weren't available, publishers would make sure even digital editions cost even more than they do now.

Mind, I think that the matter of poverty needs to be addressed at a societal level, to ensure that people shouldn't "need" to pirate their entertainment. That justification should simply not hold any water in a first world country. It's really sad that it does.

Oh, definitely. That said, it's not only the poverty-stricken who can't readily afford games. Even if you're relatively well off, it's difficult to lose £40 or even £50 if you want to play a game.

Yes, I know. I have a bad habit of phrasing my posts in an accusational manner. I apologize for that, for what that's worth and will try to stop doing so.

No worries.

I think it's important to consider that you do not have a right to have it, at all times. To ask yourself - Could I really not pay for this?

I'm all for everyone playing as many games as possible, but I'm also against the notion of people getting things for nothing (Which might sound ironic, considering that I have an ideology which leans towards socialism).

I don't want people to make excuses for why they pirate, period.

If you think you have a good reason, keep it to yourself. Because trying to paint piracy as the solution to problems is insanity.

Well, I agree there. Piracy is hardly a moral stance. It's just one of convenience.

Out of interest, what do you feel about instances in which the artist actually wants you to pirate their work? A high-profile example is MC Lars. Also, sorry about the delay.

 

[maninahat]

Anything that could serve to piss off pirates, without hampering the legit customers is fine in my book. The sanctimony of some pirates infuriates me.

 

[Scow2]

As for rentals, they always were and still are a scam. The only purpose they serve is to give money to the people least responsible for the creation of the product.

Same goes for second hand sales, which are only excused by the practical fact of limited physical copies.

... no they're not. Both are excused by the practical fact of limited physical copies. Rental companies need to buy the games they rent out, and replace them as well. However, every individual copy of the game is only played by one person at any given time.

You sound like one of those cinema-era suits railing against the home video industry and the movie rentals that made home video lucrative in the first place.

Frankly... I think rentals should be seen as the default form of console game purchases, with outright purchase of the game reserved for those who truly enjoy it enough to see it as worth the cost.

Libraries are publicly-funded. Developers/publishers still get their money for the copies purchased - the financial burden is just distributed through the taxpayers.



As for the OP... Anti-Piracy measures discussed there is one of the reasons of the death of my favorite studio (Iron Lore) and game (Titan Quest). There are a number of problems with injecting bugs into games that trigger on piracy:
1. Pirates spread word-of-mouth anti-advertising dismissing the product as a Buggy Mess (Because their version is a buggy mess)
2. The Anti-piracy bugs sometimes work their way into a legitimate copy of the game.
3. Legitimate customers who end up with the anti-piracy bugs inflicted on their game get mis-identified as pirates by customer service, and treated as dirt. Or, actually are pirates, pretend to be legitimate customers getting treated as shit by Customer Service, and smear the company and game (See point 1 above).

 

[Mutant1988]

Out of interest, what do you feel about instances in which the artist actually wants you to pirate their work? A high-profile example is MC Lars. Also, sorry about the delay.

I would assume that artist has another source of income. It's his art - He's free to do what he wants with it.

 

[Mutant1988]

As for rentals, they always were and still are a scam. The only purpose they serve is to give money to the people least responsible for the creation of the product.

Same goes for second hand sales, which are only excused by the practical fact of limited physical copies.

... no they're not.

I did later clarify that I meant the large scale exploitation with that. And how it does not apply to a digital marketplace (Which doesn't have any copies to continually exploit for infinite profit).

Which you can't do anything about without undermining the abilities for end users to resell their copy.

I'm all in favour of the right of resale.

Frankly... I think rentals should be seen as the default form of console game purchases, with outright purchase of the game reserved for those who truly enjoy it enough to see it as worth the cost.

The problem with that is that people will finish games during the rental and never actually buy them. Which will effectively kill the sales of short singleplayer games.

The term "Nintendo Hard" existed for a reason back in the day. It probably would be grinding excessively to unlock anything these days (Like phone games are, unless you pay).

 

[DoPo]

Libraries are free, though, whereas subscriptions to streaming services are not.

Any library I've used has had a subscription or a fee. Well, aside from the libraries I used while in school...which were only ever free for the students in that school and not accessible to anybody else. Also lacking that many general books.

 

[Silvanus]

Any library I've used has had a subscription or a fee. Well, aside from the libraries I used while in school...which were only ever free for the students in that school and not accessible to anybody else. Also lacking that many general books.

Really? My local libraries have always been free. Maybe it's a UK thing.

 

[Unia]

I have wholeheartedly hated DRM since SecuROM messed up my registry to the point I had to re-install my OS. No game is worth that much hassle. Some CDs refusing to play in the car stereo because of some DRM tomfoolery sure didn't help.

You know what would dismantle half of the arguments in favor of pirating games? Playable demos! Suddenly you don't have to pore over system requirements or lurk technical forums to guess the odds that your computer will run the game AND you get a hands-on feel for the game if you're on the fence about purchase. I've bought some games in recent years entirely thanks to the demo.

 

[Godhead]

Nope, they should spend the money and time that they put in for anti-piracy measures to be put into creating a more polished product and bits of promotion that are substantive (like a playable demo) and increasing positive relations with the consumers.

 

[Mikeybb]

I've always been fond of CD projekt Red's way of dealing with this.
Being genuinely good folks who shower you with free stuff.

I haven't pirated or played a pirated game for a long, long time.
So long I'm sure it was on a floppy disk.
However, I could imagine that those guys would still have got my money, no matter what.

 

[Jake Torrance]

A lot of people seem to forget that some pirates eventually buy the games they pirate. I'll be honest to a fault here where I have pirated, but if I really liked the game I did in fact buy it - I know this kind of thing is anecdotal evidence, but i've found other people have done that too. Other than that, some people just don't have the money to buy it in the first place.

 

[mrdude2010]

The best way to combat piracy is to make it way more convenient and easy to purchase the game legally. The RIAA didn't kill Napster and Limewire, Itunes did. It was a lot easier to just buy a song you liked for $.99 rather than either buy an entire album in person or try to find a download that wouldn't give you computer AIDS. An example of how not to do this is basically any recent major release that requires an always-on connection. An example of how to do this correctly is Steam (except for the games where they make you launch a third party program like Uplay).

 

[Amaror]

Hypocrisy
noun: a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude


They could put games on steam without drm but don't. They play to gallery by pretending to be against them man while shielding themselves with DRM on 80% of their sales. You can twist and turn as much as you like but it won't change the fact the they have option of no DRM but don't use it on steam.

What how? Tell me EXACTLY how they could do that. Because Steam itself is the drm. So please tell me how CDPR could possible have it's games on an DRM-Platform without DRM. I would very much like to know that.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

Make good games.
Pirates will always pirate, and any sort of anti piracy method gets beaten.
People who pay for games, will buy yours if its good enough

 

[Albino Boo]

Hypocrisy
noun: a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude


They could put games on steam without drm but don't. They play to gallery by pretending to be against them man while shielding themselves with DRM on 80% of their sales. You can twist and turn as much as you like but it won't change the fact the they have option of no DRM but don't use it on steam.

What how? Tell me EXACTLY how they could do that. Because Steam itself is the drm. So please tell me how CDPR could possible have it's games on an DRM-Platform without DRM. I would very much like to know that.

Small but rather important point Bastion is available on steam without DRM. CD project can ask steam to turn off the DRM but don't

Hypocrisy
noun: a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude

 

[DoPo]

Hypocrisy
noun: a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude


They could put games on steam without drm but don't. They play to gallery by pretending to be against them man while shielding themselves with DRM on 80% of their sales. You can twist and turn as much as you like but it won't change the fact the they have option of no DRM but don't use it on steam.

What how? Tell me EXACTLY how they could do that. Because Steam itself is the drm. So please tell me how CDPR could possible have it's games on an DRM-Platform without DRM. I would very much like to know that.

Does this answer your question?

Actually, you can have DRM free games on Steam. Bindings of Isaac is one - you basically buy it through Steam and download it from there but you don't need Steam to run it. It very loosely uses Steam just for achievements and only if Steam is running at the same time as BoI. In effect, it's not really much different than if you get the game through GOG as there you'll also pay GOG and download it from them.

 

[Zeterai]

DRM's.. realistically not going to work most of the time. More intrusive, more elaborate, and deeper security measures that involve themselves in the entirety of the game, forcing every aspect to be online and verified all of the time, cause problems as we've seen with Diablo and Sim City recently. Those kinds of systems are like chocolate covered cocaine to most of the cracking scene; defeating and subverting the security is a challenge, a test of their abilities. Actually distributing it and having the broken copies work for so many people is a monument to their programming and problem solving capabilities - they don't do it for teh lulz, they don't do it for money, and they don't do it for any sense of community; they do it for the challenge. The more involved the DRM, the more interesting a problem it becomes, and the more attention it receives from the people who want to defeat that security, which somewhat paradoxically ends up with it being cracked faster.

So you get into territory of the developers who introduce bugged copies of the game on popular torrent sites, to try and find people who get those copies and then ask for help. It works for a couple schmucks who were stupid enough to ask the devs about a clearly intentional problem. And then it's cracked and doesn't cause an issue anymore. Worse though, are the cases where such a thing was introduced, but also occasionally affected legitimate users. Do you have any idea how frustrating it is to have your copy either sitting in your Steam library or held in your hands, that utterly refuses to work properly, and then when seeking technical support get told to just buy the game you cheap pirate bastard? Getting a refund after you've tried to install something is difficult in most circumstances, and the developers are mocking you for their game being broken. So you pirate a fixed copy that doesn't have the issue, or any DRM, or anything at all to stop you playing it. And then the next time that developer brings out a game, you remember what happened last time, and go straight to piracy. While not the majority situation, if it happens at all your DRM is failing.

In the end, you know what the best way to stop people taking copies of your game is? Making an extremely good one, offering good support, and throwing out a ton of free DLC. This makes people want to pay you for your efforts, not feel like a pirated copy will work better, and makes it too annoying to crack all the various updates for people to bother with. Plenty of devs have taken this route with excellent success, while sidestepping completely any notion of DRM. Customers are not your enemy, to be viewed with suspicion and accusatory glares, and your prized game is not a precious jewel that you only part with grudgingly after making sure their intentions are noble.

 

[jackpipsam]

I am in favor for anything to annoy or inconvenience pirates.
If they didn't buy it, they don't have any rights about the game.

 

[DoPo]

DRM's.. realistically not going to work most of the time. More intrusive, more elaborate, and deeper security measures that involve themselves in the entirety of the game, forcing every aspect to be online and verified all of the time, cause problems as we've seen with Diablo and Sim City recently.

Forget those two, let's just go to the source - AC2 was the first game that introduced just that - Ubisoft claimed the game was uncrackable, since the scheme they used to protect it more or less contacted home before loading assets. And it was still cracked in the end - not that long after release, either. But when the Ubisoft servers went offline (twice, I think?) it was the legit copies that stopped working.

 

[Elfgore]

I was just watching a podcast where the topic up for discussion was piracy. They mentioned that the developers of Magicka and Cities: Skylines have done it right. They release patches so often, that pirating the game becomes too much of a hassle. Since they have to re-download every update. The pirates just end up purchasing the game to make their lives easier. Everything they said makes sense, paying consumers don't get the shaft and actually benefit. Now, how true all that is, I don't know. But if it is true, I like it and other companies should follow suit.