Draconian DRM and how it can kill sales

[Cobalt Lion]

You know, it is funny. When I first saw the title to this thread, before I clicked and read it; that is EXACTLY the game I was thinking about. Miner Wars 2081 was looking good. Good enough to buy, in fact. It was the news of the DRM that made me put away my wallet. A lot of people in the Steam Forums were saying the same thing, and Keen Software's response has been to the effect of "suck it."

I really think that some of the other methods listed above would have been a much better idea than the always-on solution.

Regarding the above posted who said something about correlation not always equaling causation, I agree, but sometimes correlation DOES show a trend.

 

[RejjeN]

It's ironic how DRM like this actually encourages piracy.

But it's not exactly Draconian, since you don't get your tongue cut out or anything for trying to pirate games.

It's Draconian for the simple reason it only punishes the consumers and not the pirates. Sure, it might take a little longer for a cracked version to be released, but it's not going to stop it from happening and then the pirates enjoy a better (singleplayer) experience than the consumers! SOMETHING isn't right there, just sayin'

 

[Coffeejack]

It sounds like this company doesn't really know what it's doing. Are there legal consequences for misleading customers over DRM like that? Could they be forced to refund their customers(Nope, didn't buy)?

 

[major_chaos]

Now we've seen Blizzard lose the trust of a lot of people with Diablo 3's DRM hampering the single player gameplay significantly.

But not enough to kill sales, also never understood people whining about this, I never had any problems, and no one I know had any problems, so this seemed to mostly just be people getting offended on principle.

Spoiler: spoilered for length

We've seen Ubisoft go from being the biggest advocate of strict DRM on PC releases to dropping the asinine model after seeing the DRM cause a 90% loss in PC sales.

[citation needed] Especially considering that Farcry 3 has been on the steam top sellers chart for awhile now.

Now we have an indie developer implementing the same type of invasive DRM into their game.

Are you talking about..

Miner Wars 2081.

Oh boy...

The game itself looks to be actually pretty cool,

It actually isn't I bought it way back in alpha and the final product is highly disappointing.

but since it was Greenlit on Steam, the Steam users have been very vocally displeased with Keen Software House' implementation of the DRM.

That's an understatement.

The DRM is effectively the same as Diablo 3's. Required to register an account and log in to play, even in single player. Required to be online at all times.

Been that way since alpha.

This leads to people experiencing slowdown due to server lag when in single player and other annoyances caused by the DRM.

Really? because not only have I never experienced any lag, most people I see whining about it don't mention lag, just "EEEKK DRM" (on the steam forums no less, the irony is searing)

1. Steam effectively is DRM enough for any game sold on it. Why the developer chose to add an extra think layer of it it beyond me.

Miner Wars isn't just on steam, it is also on other platforms that are not DRM, and they aren't going to make a different version just for steam.

2.This is a small time inde developer. Having witnessed Ubisoft's sales get vaporized when it started its DRM crusade should have been a sign to most developers.

See my point way back at the top.

3.Keen Software House is actively censoring anyone who talks negatively about the DRM on Miner Wars forums. This is kind of low. Also this:SNIP
The developers themselves have responded to a thread on the Steam forums asking the OP to "give them a chance". This was after they censored them on the Miner Wars forums. The OP isn't the only one they've censored either.

"give us a chance" isn't an unfair thing to say when the first reaction to a game you worked hard on is a temper tantrum. Also I think they may be "censoring" some posts becuse as with D3 a fair number of people jumped right past reasonable discourse to scream, rage, curse and endorse piracy.

4. They've done everything in their power to hide the fact that the DRM is there. Even lying about the DRM.

That's right the developers know enough that DRM pisses gamers of for the most part so they tried to deceive people about it. Another low move. (Read the Steam thread linked for more context).

They are doing a damn good job considering I wouldn't have known if I hadn't checked the forums, not that I care mind you, if I buy a game on Steam I assume it is online only because offline mode works only when it feels like it.

Now, what do you people think about this? I know that the developer has a right to put DRM on their game, but the consumers have a right to be pissed about the way it is being handled.

I think that just like with D3 this is people having a fit over nothing, the big difference is that D3 was actually good. If Miner Wars fails I think it will be more because word got out that it isn't a very good game.

Will this be the first and last time that a small indie developer tries this kind of DRM?

Probably not.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Now we've seen Blizzard lose the trust of a lot of people with Diablo 3's DRM hampering the single player gameplay significantly.

I don't think it was "trust", simply that people chose not to put with it. I for one didn't, and will not buy d3 because of it but it's sold over 10mill copies and broken records even without me.

We've seen Ubisoft go from being the biggest advocate of strict DRM on PC releases to dropping the asinine model after seeing the DRM cause a 90% loss in PC sales.

Holy crap, I didn't know this. Just googled it and you're right, Ubisoft have in fact dropped always-on and activation limits, requiring now only a one-time activation. I'm gonna have to rethink my entire attitude toward Ubi now....former villains who turned away from the evil path to walk with the good and righteous. Kinda like Vader at the end of RotJ, only without the stupid "Nooooooooooooooo". Guess I'll start paying attention again to their doings, comings and goings.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

Now we've seen Blizzard lose the trust of a lot of people with Diablo 3's DRM hampering the single player gameplay significantly.

But not enough to kill sales, also never understood people whining about this, I never had any problems, and no one I know had any problems, so this seemed to mostly just be people getting offended on principle.

Spoiler: spoilered for length

We've seen Ubisoft go from being the biggest advocate of strict DRM on PC releases to dropping the asinine model after seeing the DRM cause a 90% loss in PC sales.

[citation needed] Especially considering that Farcry 3 has been on the steam top sellers chart for awhile now.

Spoiler: spoilered for length

Just google it. Another poster on the thread did.

The DRM is effectively the same as Diablo 3's. Required to register an account and log in to play, even in single player. Required to be online at all times.

Been that way since alpha.[/quote] Not my point. My point is they are now actively trying to hide it from new customers.

This leads to people experiencing slowdown due to server lag when in single player and other annoyances caused by the DRM.

Really? because not only have I never experienced any lag, most people I see whining about it don't mention lag, just "EEEKK DRM" (on the steam forums no less, the irony is searing)[/quote] So because it hasn't happened to you it can't happen? See I hate that kind of argument, it proves nothing. Also considering that its still possible for someone's ISP to go down in this day and age due to a number of reasons the always online DRM is still a massive pain. But my issues is more with the way the developers are handling the situation.

1. Steam effectively is DRM enough for any game sold on it. Why the developer chose to add an extra think layer of it it beyond me.

Miner Wars isn't just on steam, it is also on other platforms that are not DRM, and they aren't going to make a different version just for steam.[/quote] Still doesn't excuse the censorship on their forums. Or the fact that they have been deceitful about the DRM being there in the first place.

2.This is a small time inde developer. Having witnessed Ubisoft's sales get vaporized when it started its DRM crusade should have been a sign to most developers.

See my point way back at the top.[/quote] I'll just link it:[link]http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/10/07/opinion-ubisoft-piracy-and-the-death-of-reason/[/link] All it took was a quick Google look. Hell, Google autofilled this one for me.

3.Keen Software House is actively censoring anyone who talks negatively about the DRM on Miner Wars forums. This is kind of low. Also this:SNIP
The developers themselves have responded to a thread on the Steam forums asking the OP to "give them a chance". This was after they censored them on the Miner Wars forums. The OP isn't the only one they've censored either.

"give us a chance" isn't an unfair thing to say when the first reaction to a game you worked hard on is a temper tantrum. Also I think they may be "censoring" some posts becuse as with D3 a fair number of people jumped right past reasonable discourse to scream, rage, curse and endorse piracy.

"Give us a chance" is a bullshit thing to say AFTER you've been caught lying on the matter and blocking opinions to get sales. That's not excusable.

4. They've done everything in their power to hide the fact that the DRM is there. Even lying about the DRM.

That's right the developers know enough that DRM pisses gamers of for the most part so they tried to deceive people about it. Another low move. (Read the Steam thread linked for more context).

They are doing a damn good job considering I wouldn't have known if I hadn't checked the forums, not that I care mind you, if I buy a game on Steam I assume it is online only because offline mode works only when it feels like it.[/quote] Offline mode on Steam has been fixed for a while actually. They patched it a couple months ago.

 

[Kekkonen1]

I dont think it hurts sales as much as it should, unfortunately. I did not buy Diablo 3 despite being a HUGE Diablo-fan (I played both 1 and 2 constantly) but I suspect that I am in a clear minority. Also, even though the new Sim City seems incredibly interesting I will not buy it as long as it demands that I am always online. Neither Ubisoft nor Blizzard nor any other company has so far convinced me that always online is beneficial to me, it isn't since I dont care about online functionality, I just want a functioning offline game.

Also, two arguments people often make when discussing always online DRM that I think misses the point:

1: "I am online anyways so I dont care" - Yeah this isn't really the problem. I think most people in western countries (except the US) are online more or less constantly, I know I am. The thing is, I am not worried about the stability of MY connection, but these games have shown us that what we must be worried about is the stability of the COMPANIES' connection. It doesn't matter if I've been constantly online for 10 years running, if Blizzard can't keep their servers up I'm not playing the game anyway.

2: "Its not DRM, its a feature" - Does it matter? The effect is the same. Obviously games could be made with offline-mode before, so they can be made with an offline mode now. Why the game makers chose to do this isn't that important in my opinion. They chose to do it and we either accept it like nice little sheeps or we speak up and try to make a change.

 

[Worgen]

Never heard of this game. Will continue to never hear about it after this.

*Sits down and reads Escapist Forum*
*Notices people complain about being online when playing games*
*Realizes they are online complaining instead of playing*
*laughs*


For some reason, that is what happens everytime I read this.
You come onto the Escapist and complain about DRM, yet you are currently online and not playing the game. Chances are you are online a good 75% of the time, yet you still complain about it even when it shouldn't be an issue at this time. Then again, I was blessed to be born in the middle of bumfuck nowhere with great internet and the small times when I have no internet, I play something else... or read a book.

Mkay. Basically, the only time when DRM is a problem is when it hinders the enjoyment of the game. If you can't get to a game, I'd say the DRM is pretty detrimental. And then there's the objective decrease in the game's quality due to unnecessary delay. Do explain if you think any DRM is worth complaining about, though, I'm all ears. Because you seem to have just said that not being able to get to a game a quarter of one's fucking time is just fine and dandy.

Do I have to actually spell out the reasons for not being able to get to the game for you? Does your "I play something else"[footnote]Never mind the probability that I wouldn't want to play something else at that time.[/footnote] babble account for the possibility of people like you ushering in an age where practically every game has DRM like this? Yeah, you go read a fucking book and don't condescendingly tell people how to spend their time, how about that.

By the way, some people have an internet connection that's barely good enough for browsing (e.g. visiting the Escapist), and completely shitty when it comes to any sort of gaming. Just thought you'd know.

Don't be so angry. I never said what YOU should do. I am just saying what I do and what MY opinions are on the subject. Isn't that the point of a forum? Expressing opinions about the subject at hand? I don't promote DRM, yet I don't care if it is there anyway either as it doesn't affect ME. Which was the point of my paragraph that I had written.

I remember that I posted about this on my last post on this page. Do you even read the entire thread before angrily insulting someone?

DRM like this comes down to this, do you like to feel like you own your game? DRM that requires constant connection takes away that feeling, you know your only renting the game until the servers are down. There was a rather big fuss when they finally took away the online play for halo 2, imagine if that also stopped you from being able to play the single player.

 

[kenu12345]

*sighs* does noone here know the meaning of the word tone

 

[fisk0]

*Sits down and reads Escapist Forum*
*Notices people complain about being online when playing games*
*Realizes they are online complaining instead of playing*
*laughs*


For some reason, that is what happens everytime I read this.
You come onto the Escapist and complain about DRM, yet you are currently online and not playing the game. Chances are you are online a good 75% of the time, yet you still complain about it even when it shouldn't be an issue at this time. Then again, I was blessed to be born in the middle of bumfuck nowhere with great internet and the small times when I have no internet, I play something else... or read a book.

You're missing a pretty important step here. It isn't just about you being connected to the Internet. It's also about adding at least two possible points of failure - your end, their end and possibly the link between (which happens regularly if we're dealing with servers on separate continents). You could have a fully operating 1gigabit/s line, but if their server is down or inaccessible (they're indie developers, I don't think we can assume that they can have EU, US, African and Austrian, Russian, Chinese and Japanese servers to minimize the latency and the amount of nodes between the client and host machine), you're out of luck playing a game that's marketed as a game with a significant single player campaign. Especially when it's not just a one time online authentication like what Steam games usually do, but needs an continous connection to a server at an unknown location, with an unknown capacity.

Also, while the idea of bandwidth caps might seem ridiculous to most Internet users in Europe, in the US it seems pretty common, and then having a game - which you're playing alone - unnecessarily and opaquely transmitting an unknown amount of data in the background could be disastrous for your Internet bill.

 

[Worgen]

Never heard of this game. Will continue to never hear about it after this.

*Sits down and reads Escapist Forum*
*Notices people complain about being online when playing games*
*Realizes they are online complaining instead of playing*
*laughs*


For some reason, that is what happens everytime I read this.
You come onto the Escapist and complain about DRM, yet you are currently online and not playing the game. Chances are you are online a good 75% of the time, yet you still complain about it even when it shouldn't be an issue at this time. Then again, I was blessed to be born in the middle of bumfuck nowhere with great internet and the small times when I have no internet, I play something else... or read a book.

Mkay. Basically, the only time when DRM is a problem is when it hinders the enjoyment of the game. If you can't get to a game, I'd say the DRM is pretty detrimental. And then there's the objective decrease in the game's quality due to unnecessary delay. Do explain if you think any DRM is worth complaining about, though, I'm all ears. Because you seem to have just said that not being able to get to a game a quarter of one's fucking time is just fine and dandy.

Do I have to actually spell out the reasons for not being able to get to the game for you? Does your "I play something else"[footnote]Never mind the probability that I wouldn't want to play something else at that time.[/footnote] babble account for the possibility of people like you ushering in an age where practically every game has DRM like this? Yeah, you go read a fucking book and don't condescendingly tell people how to spend their time, how about that.

By the way, some people have an internet connection that's barely good enough for browsing (e.g. visiting the Escapist), and completely shitty when it comes to any sort of gaming. Just thought you'd know.

Don't be so angry. I never said what YOU should do. I am just saying what I do and what MY opinions are on the subject. Isn't that the point of a forum? Expressing opinions about the subject at hand? I don't promote DRM, yet I don't care if it is there anyway either as it doesn't affect ME. Which was the point of my paragraph that I had written.

I remember that I posted about this on my last post on this page. Do you even read the entire thread before angrily insulting someone?

DRM like this comes down to this, do you like to feel like you own your game? DRM that requires constant connection takes away that feeling, you know your only renting the game until the servers are down. There was a rather big fuss when they finally took away the online play for halo 2, imagine if that also stopped you from being able to play the single player.

Hm, didn't think about that. I know this will happen eventually to some games like Tribes: Ascend and World of Warcraft, which does irk me a bit as I have spent quite a bit of time within those worlds. I do wish they would create an entire file of each of the iterations of those games (specifically the latter) where you could just go jump into the world, albeit solo or on Local internet or instanced areas created from your personal computer so it can live on.

However in Halo 2, while the Competitive Multiplayer is dead, isn't Co-Op and LAN still perfectly usable? So it isn't like that entire "experience" is completely dead. It can live on in smaller droves in more personal settings.

Now for other DRM, aren't 99% of them much like STEAM where, once the servers are down, you can play the games offline whenever you want? I know Blizzard said Diablo would work that way, as did Valve with most of their games. However some of these smaller competitors like the company who is being spoke of in this thread, I know nothing about in how their DRM practices work.

Lan play and split screen are still available on halo 2 but thats because it was made in a time when internet connections on the xbox were still rather rare, imagine if the game was something like diablo 3 where it requires always on connections for anything and doesn't have lan play at all, now I doubt blizzard is going out of business anytime soon but it makes a good example.

It varies between services, the ubisoft one originally would kick you out of the game if it disconnected for any reason and had no offline mode at all. I've heard they have recently backed off on that but apparently when farcry 3 launched in europe the drm servers were down and it was a huge pain in the ass getting it to play without them. http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/11/30/far-cry-3-servers-down-already-ubi-this-is-a-mess/

The games for windows live drm is just a huge pain in the ass, it does work offline... kinda. Some games require you to update it which, at least with xp, was a huge pain since the service wouldn't update itself so you had look around online to find the update, then dl it then wait for the update to go though then start the client and wait again while it installed itself slowly.

Ultimately I like steam, but I harbor no illusions about what it is, and I worry about what will happen to it once Gabe retires.

 

[Something Amyss]

Ubisoft saw a 90% drop in their PC sales when they enacted their DRM policies.

They claimed that there was a 90% piracy rate in general. Slightly different.

Blizzard lost a lot of respect from their fans over Diablo 3's DRM.

And is one of the most successful companies around right now. That hurt them, how?

EA actually got damaged by the backlash against Mass Effect 3. THQ was actually hurt by its business decisions. Blizzard is sleeping on a bed of money.

Ubisoft was so effected by the hate for DRM, the removed it.

They removed it on older games and still do it on newer ones. Not exactly the impact you make it out to be.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

Ubisoft saw a 90% drop in their PC sales when they enacted their DRM policies.

They claimed that there was a 90% piracy rate in general. Slightly different.
The 90% drop in sales is a fact that has been linked a few times in this thread. If there was a 90% piracy rate of Ubisoft games that would probably have put them in the same boat as THQ or dropping PC support completely.

Blizzard lost a lot of respect from their fans over Diablo 3's DRM.

And is one of the most successful companies around right now. That hurt them, how?
A lot of people are not going to be buying Blizzard games, that's how. With the Mist of Pandaria's retail sales showing significantly lower sales than other WoW expansions, that's already happening. People have been getting sick of Blizzard since Starcraft 2's handling. People don't want invasive DRM for a game that they play single player. People don't want to play Kung Fu Panda. Doesn't matter that the Panderans are in Warcraft lore, they were still a borderline April Fool Easter egg.

EA actually got damaged by the backlash against Mass Effect 3.
More Bioware than EA. Look at how many key people left Bioware. The founders, the Mass Effect scriptwriter, one of the lead designers. Bioware is dying slowly due to Bioware, not EA for once.
THQ was actually hurt by its business decisions.

Agreed, though trying to make their games into DLC money farms didn't help.

Blizzard is sleeping on a bed of money.
You're point? They've lost a lot of respect. And unless they make a new IP, World of Warcraft is slowly dying, Diablo 3 has pissed too many people for people to trust a 4th entry into the series if it happens, and Starcraft 2's Battle.net has kneecapped interest in that game, along with the way that they are releasing one race per expansion pack. Blizzard's main cash cow is WoW and that game is losing to LoL and a lot of Free 2 Play games. Hell, Guild Wars 2 is taking chunks of the WoW populous. Point is, Blizzard has no upcoming project at all, nothing to be excited over, and a lot of lost trust.

Ubisoft was so effected by the hate for DRM, the removed it.

They removed it on older games and still do it on newer ones. Not exactly the impact you make it out to be.

Umm, not really? Considering AC3 came out with no DRM I have trouble believing that statement.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

So far with DRM it's either strict "draconian" laws that paradoxically lead to piracy or companies like EA running around fixing their own mess (i.e. Spore, Mass Effect). We have yet to see the companies compromising.