imagine the cognitive dissonance thats going to occur when someone finally does implement an unbreakable DRM, and the game STILL sells like crap. youll hear the sounds of executive's head exploding all over the place. meanwhile, indie devs will just tool right along, selling their games without DRM (and save money from not licensing DRM), develop a loyal customer base, and not sweat the "lost" non-sales from piracy just like they have been for a while now.
Impossible (to beat) DRM
- Thread starter Shamus Young
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It's a good point that for ConViction for example, people have been waiting years now. Waiting a couple of weeks more -shouldn't- be a problem (though I suspect it would be for piratesFlying Dagger said:
)As for drawing attention... Well... it's news
It's hard to deny so...
I've had a cracked Assassin's Creed 2 for Xbox 360 since it came out. I don't play online either. Maybe this article only applies to the PC.
That's alright, Capcom has also stated why they put DRM onto a Playstation Network game, and it wasn't because of piracy. Instead it was rampant "game sharing" that led to its inclusion on Final Fight.
Everyone and their dog knows the real truth, that piracy is not the reason for DRM. It's that the companies want every little bit of money from every single person they can, thus they produce something to fight used game sales and sharing and blame it on those that pirate, saying it's all their fault.
The question is, how long will the gamers roll over and accept it?
Everyone and their dog knows the real truth, that piracy is not the reason for DRM. It's that the companies want every little bit of money from every single person they can, thus they produce something to fight used game sales and sharing and blame it on those that pirate, saying it's all their fault.
The question is, how long will the gamers roll over and accept it?
I actually posted pretty much the same a while back in another thread here: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.178799-Ubisoft-Denies-Launch-Day-Crack-for-Silent-Hunter-5-DRM?page=3#5207473
I really think it can work. I don't really understand how some people can say that crackers just need to crack the "trigger code". I assume they mean the code that will communicate with the publisher's servers in order to request the necessary game logic, but it seems to me that this communication can fairly easily be protected by forcing the user to sign in to the server with his own username and password (and a serial).
Or is it that they will just be able to find all the "trigger code" easily and then immediately request all of the related logic from the servers with their own legitimate copy and then offer those files up for download?
I really think it can work. I don't really understand how some people can say that crackers just need to crack the "trigger code". I assume they mean the code that will communicate with the publisher's servers in order to request the necessary game logic, but it seems to me that this communication can fairly easily be protected by forcing the user to sign in to the server with his own username and password (and a serial).
Or is it that they will just be able to find all the "trigger code" easily and then immediately request all of the related logic from the servers with their own legitimate copy and then offer those files up for download?
I refuse to buy anything from Ubisoft because of their DRM, and I also wont pirate it. So they are loosing sales over it.addeB said:
Any single player game that has any kind of DRM beyond "disk in drive" (and even then ill find a nocd for it) will not get a dime from me.
Then again most "big" pc games nowadays are crapass console ports so they aren't worth playing if they were free.
Then again most "big" pc games nowadays are crapass console ports so they aren't worth playing if they were free.
I wont buy another Ubisoft game until they stop treating us loyal customers like criminals. If they treat me like a criminal why should I give them my money? If I'm treated like a criminal I may as well be one. At least I'll save some money to buy games from publishers that care about customers.
It's not exactly a secret that pirating games is a huge business, but ironically, this isn't the kind of pirating that modern publishing houses are worried about. You see, commercial pirating mostly isn't done in Western countries, but rather in Eastern Europe and Asia, where you are literally going to stumble over three guys trying to sell you pirated movies while on your way to the grocer's.
Western "piracy" groups literally do it only for the kicks. When a warez group publishes something, they are going to do it in private, in some isolated IRC channel or non-public bulletin board. This is because the Western "warez scene" is, despite appearances, really a pretty tiny and incenstuous thing. Every thing you see on torrent or warez sites was really leaked to there at one point or another, it wasn't made for these sites.
So why don't publisher's care for the huge piracy markets in the east? Because that's not where the money is coming from, and because huge money making criminal cartels are MUCH harder (and more dangerous) to prosecute than a bunch of tech-savvy guys who crack games for the hell of it. Publishers fight what they know, not necessarily what they should be worried about. But considering the kind of corruption and favor-mongering that's going in in western corporations, this shouldn't really surprise anyone.
[Edit:] Also, there literally isn't a way to make an uncrackable DRM, period. Unless you store most of the game code on a remote server, like MMORPGs tend to do, the complete game resources will always be in the customers possession, with only the access to the game information being restricted. Getting access to this information is just a matter of time, so unless major publishers are willing to go the MMO way, DRM is effectively going nowhere.
It's almost as if Ubisoft are saying:Woodsey said:
You can either take the easy way and buy the game, which will result in it breaking down all the time and your gaming experience being ruined.
Or you can work (or wait) your ass of for a few weeks or months and voila, now you can play the game offline without any issues!
Assassins Creed 2, being a pain in the ass for everyone.
That was an offline server, and parts of the game were still locked because the server lacked the proper code for it. Now there's a simple file that makes the game automatically think your computer is the server.(well, I think that's the way it's done)Nurb said:
The most annoying thing being that the game is fucking brilliant.Hubilub said:
I bought it on the 360 back when it released (I'm sorry, I cannot wait for 3 months for no particular reason!) and it was incredible. Now all its famous for is being the first to use their shitty DRM.
Second. Silent Hunter 5 used it first. I don't know if Command and Conquer 4 used the same system or one based on it, but either way... But yeah, you're right. Good game famous for the wrong reasons.Woodsey said:
Likewise, and while I don't buy PC Gamer magazine, I have to say that they're right to decry the PC version. Ubisoft were way out of line, and it's pretty clear that piracy doesn't impact sales nearly as much as they claim they do. I think I only ever downloaded a PC game once, and it was a pretty old game that was WAY beyond any reasonable sales figures.Nurb said:
I hope gamers don't let Ubisoft forget this bullshit any time soon.
*sigh*
What we have here is a lose-lose situation.
I know, I know, how dare Ubisoft put into place this ridiculous and intrustive copy-protection scheme that punishes legitimate customers. I can't really scold anyone who buys the game and picks up the relevant crack so as not to be the prisoner of Ubisoft's servers and the dubious quality of their Internet connection.
But it's really not helping anyone to be going "Hooray, the evil game company got schooled!" (Add Nelson laugh if desired.) Yes, the DRM was stupid, but... That "evil game company" is the same one that put out the game for the PC in the first place.
And I like being able to play games on my PC.
And every time something like this happens, there's a few fewer games that get ported to the PC next year.
It's just... so... stupid. PCs shouldn't be the smallest platform; there are PCs in far more homes than there are any of the consoles. But most of the games require more horsepower than a "casual user" PC dishes out out of the box... And Intel, Microsoft, AMD and their lot can't quite seem to get their act together, and occasionally make me wonder if they're even trying. Games For Windows indeed...
And, yes, there's piracy. The PC was first to the 'net, and first to set up communities there... And the bar set on the knowledge necessary for early admission to the club, combined with the non-proprietary nature of the hardware, almost inevitably meant that at least some of the people playing would be the equals in technical know-how of the people coding the game... And the DRM.
I can't help but wonder if PCs are the sacrificial goat of the gaming industry. There's already piracy on the consoles as well. If the PC gaming market dies, or at least navigates away from the big-budget, triple-A platinum releases, will that bunch of pirates just go away? Or will they then spread out to descend on the consoles?
What we have here is a lose-lose situation.
I know, I know, how dare Ubisoft put into place this ridiculous and intrustive copy-protection scheme that punishes legitimate customers. I can't really scold anyone who buys the game and picks up the relevant crack so as not to be the prisoner of Ubisoft's servers and the dubious quality of their Internet connection.
But it's really not helping anyone to be going "Hooray, the evil game company got schooled!" (Add Nelson laugh if desired.) Yes, the DRM was stupid, but... That "evil game company" is the same one that put out the game for the PC in the first place.
And I like being able to play games on my PC.
And every time something like this happens, there's a few fewer games that get ported to the PC next year.
It's just... so... stupid. PCs shouldn't be the smallest platform; there are PCs in far more homes than there are any of the consoles. But most of the games require more horsepower than a "casual user" PC dishes out out of the box... And Intel, Microsoft, AMD and their lot can't quite seem to get their act together, and occasionally make me wonder if they're even trying. Games For Windows indeed...
And, yes, there's piracy. The PC was first to the 'net, and first to set up communities there... And the bar set on the knowledge necessary for early admission to the club, combined with the non-proprietary nature of the hardware, almost inevitably meant that at least some of the people playing would be the equals in technical know-how of the people coding the game... And the DRM.
I can't help but wonder if PCs are the sacrificial goat of the gaming industry. There's already piracy on the consoles as well. If the PC gaming market dies, or at least navigates away from the big-budget, triple-A platinum releases, will that bunch of pirates just go away? Or will they then spread out to descend on the consoles?