DRM Is Still Dumb, Says CD Projekt
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
Let my words be carved hier in stone forever:
in 10 years or less, the DRM free Publishers and Devs will be the only ones left standing.
,...well except for Steam.
in 10 years or less, the DRM free Publishers and Devs will be the only ones left standing.
,...well except for Steam.
Greg Tito said:
So because every shoplifter wouldn't buy the thing they steal, stores should remove their security measures? Bottom line here why buy the cow when you have can the milk? Its the same old tried hippy argument, intellectually vapid and morally vacuous, but you get strike a pose look down on everyone else.
You're missing the point, here. He's not saying pirating is ok because those people wouldn't have bought the game anyway, he's saying that DRM is a waste of resource, time and development since every single game gets cracked almost to the day the get released. So why bother... Not only that but it also annoys the legit buyer and even sometimes renders the game less efficient. Best example : those Ubi Soft always online DRM, You can't play if you don't have internet access, or if their server is down or whatever whereas the cracked version runs just fine on its own whenever you want it. No wonder they ended up officially releasing the crack as a patch for assassin's creed 2 (even forgetting to remove the Razor1911 tag from the code).albino boo said:
So to take your shoplifting comparison, it would be more like having to go through a full bodysearch for every customer that wants to leave the shop by the front door while they keep a small backdoor open without any security except for a sign saying "yes its easier, more convinient and less fussy to leave through here but the law says you can't even if no one will ever know you did"...
But publishers are just stubborn and will always push their custommer base away like that... It's like those ridiculous new unskippable warnings they plan on adding on legit copies of DVDs which will only piss off those who bought them while the pirates, who they were supposed to be aimed at, will never see them and just enjoy the movie without that extra hassle XD
Dammit CD Projekt, your awesomeness is making me want to go out and buy the Witcher 2 for the 360 but I don't have any money right now.
Still, these guys know what they're talking about, if Diablo 3's any indication DRM most certainly doesn't work and is just a good way to get your paying customers pissed off at you.
Still, these guys know what they're talking about, if Diablo 3's any indication DRM most certainly doesn't work and is just a good way to get your paying customers pissed off at you.
Yeah, everybody in this thread is singing his praises now, but I bet most people here would still prefer to buy a game on Steam over GoG. Which proves people say they hate DRM, but in fact they love DRM when it's wrapped in a pretty shell.
I for one have always been against it and Steam is my last choice. Too bad I couldn't buy Witcher 2 because I just hate medieval fantasy, but I'll definitively get the modern/sci fi RPG they teased a while back.
I for one have always been against it and Steam is my last choice. Too bad I couldn't buy Witcher 2 because I just hate medieval fantasy, but I'll definitively get the modern/sci fi RPG they teased a while back.
Damn it CDPR, stop making me love you so much!
Also, CDPR owns GoG? You learn something new everyday.
Also, CDPR owns GoG? You learn something new everyday.
Ya know, I applaud CD Projekt for being a shining example of a good game developer and being anti-DRM and all that stuff, but it's really starting to sound like "DRM is bad" is all they know how to say and they have been saying it quite often too.
CD Projekt should just release a statement every day saying drm is useless:
1. Because I can't get enough of hearing about it
And 2. Constantly saying it might beat some sense into other developers
1. Because I can't get enough of hearing about it
And 2. Constantly saying it might beat some sense into other developers
Strawman argument detected.The Random One said:
Steam and GoG very rarely cater to the same crowd, and there is almost no overlap between their audiences. If steam and gog shared a far greater percentage of their catalogue, tthen you could make that argument.
Unfortunately, they only a few older games between them. And yes, I do own the GoG versions, rather then the Steam version.
Should stores leave their security measures in a product they no longer own after a customer has bought said product? If so then do customers ever really own a product when at any time, for whatever reason, it becomes impossible [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/115635-Ubisoft-Games-Unplayable-During-Server-Switch] for the consumer to use the product all because of somebody else?albino boo said:
In truth, it all sounds like you're never really buying the product. What it sounds like is you are buying a time limited access pass to use the product, time and access that anything could happen [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/114522-EAs-Online-Passes-Have-a-Limited-Shelf-Life] that could deny you the ability to play. DRM is a contradiction that by definition takes away fully having ownership of a product that you paid to own.
Here as an example a person has only truly bought the right to connect to stealing ownership [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/117297-Blizzard-Apologizes-for-Diablo-III-Launch-Troubles] of a game we owned in the first place after having bought it.
I'm guessing they only say it when asked though (and I'm sure they say lots of other things that go unreported), so it's probably more the media's fault for asking about it all the time. Though, asking about it is probably a logical response to the current DRM controversy regarding D3.romanator0 said:
Doesn't quite apply here in my opinion. Breaking the security at a department store is restricted to, most likely, a single individual who has the know how to defeat the tags. That person then can only take the item he got and sell it. Pirates, however, can break the security once, then distribute it as many times as needed.albino boo said:
Also, the little tags don't always have to be connected to the internet for you to use the item you purchased, nor does it allow you to get sick because of a virus, nor does it limit how effectively you can use the item if the tag is still there.
DRM is a completely different animal compared to those little tags.
even when im not a fan of the witcher games and will never play them, i do agree pretty much with everything he said. the worst DRM is still LIVE. really turns me off to get a game with this DRM on it.
but the trial test thing is inaccurate. yes, some people do it to make sure they dont waste their money but so many do it because they dont want to spend a single cent at all.
like a friend of mine. he thinks games these days are not even worth 10$. doesnt matter if indie games or AAA games. he thinks why spend so much money on a game that has DRM, when you can get a perfectly good copy without it and its cheaper.
at some point he is right but he kind of forgets how many people work on a game and its not as simple anymore like 10 years ago.
but the trial test thing is inaccurate. yes, some people do it to make sure they dont waste their money but so many do it because they dont want to spend a single cent at all.
like a friend of mine. he thinks games these days are not even worth 10$. doesnt matter if indie games or AAA games. he thinks why spend so much money on a game that has DRM, when you can get a perfectly good copy without it and its cheaper.
at some point he is right but he kind of forgets how many people work on a game and its not as simple anymore like 10 years ago.
Wow, that's... incredibly wrong on any number of levels, not to mention filled with a seemingly unreasoning rage directed as vaguely as possible.albino boo said:
Bottom line here: did you note the part where the "intellectual vapid and morally vacuous" argument as applied in the business model that so many people here are applauding also seems to be incredibly successful?
