Online Activation Is a Ripoff

[Elementlmage]

I'll throw my hat in the ring too.

NWN1+expansions(logged about 2k hours in multi; serial, it's 10x better than WoW)
No One Lives Forever 2 (easily one of the best FPSs of all time and easily makes the Halo series its *****)
Homeworld 1
Homeworld 2(Best Spaceship design EVER! The ZOMGWTFBBQHAXEPICDEATH Ship you work 4/5ths of the game to earn makes all the hard work feel soooo worth it, in every aspect)
Pacific Storm(It's not THAT old, but it is still super fun to wage massive WW2 naval battles)
Quake 4(again, not that old, but still a great game)
Morrowind
Delta Force (Some times bad AI and pixelated sand are all you need)
Medieval Total War(imo, the first is better than the second game play wise)
Warlords 2(easily one of the best RTSs of all time, and before you ask, yes, it is better than Starcraft)

Those are all games I currently have installed on my computer(gatta do something with 1.5 TB of HDD space)

Games I don't currently have installed but will probably play in the future:

Mech Warrior 4+ expansions(better than the entire Xbox Mech Warrior series COMBINED!)
Galactic Civ 2+Dread lords(Its about 1000x better than Civilization and way cooler)
Nexus(from the guys that brought you HW 2)
Halo CE(one of the best PC ports of all time, Gearbox really out did themselves. Impeccable multiplayer and completely revamped graphics, sound, and single player AI make this almost a completely different game from the console version. Hell, its better than the Halo 2 port and better than Halo 2 & 3 combined! Who wants to race some rocket hogs!!!)

 

[Markness]

stuff

more stuff

stuff x 1.5

Thanks for the input guys and although this is probably the most unscientific survey ever undertaken (sample size of three, only people that had something to list had any reason to contribute, some of the games listed are still on the shelves for instance I bought Baldurs Gate 1 + 2 last week because I lost the original disks) I see that more people might be installing old games than I thought.

However I guess this debate (the cd detection vs online activation) has been rendered unarguable because there is no way to know how many companies or communities will release patches that remove DRM. Although I think the number will be quite high, I can see that some people will be rather skeptical.

Oh and about the piracy aspect of activation vs cd detection. I will say that cd detection encourages priacy. I know people that have pirated the game just so they don't have to keep swapping disks. Since pirates all have internet connections, online activation would not affect them. If you say that activation encourages piracy because the servers might be shut down, at this point the developers aren't making any money off the games so they don't lose anything if people pirate the game. Cd is drive is a big inconvenience to most people and it just might be enough to push people to piracy.

The time it takes to crack isn't the only aspect here.

 

[likalaruku]

That & "3 install limitations" are the reason that piracy has gone UP. Fortunately there's also the ability to purchase a used copy of the came for pennies on the dollar at Amazon & eBay. There's even a conspiracy theory about DRM:

Copyjerk A: "You know what makes even more money than getting a small slice of every legal purchace, B?"
Copyjerk B: "No A, tell me how we can make more money."
Copyjerk A: "Lawsuits. We'll make obnoxious DRM that will drive potential legitimate purchacers to piracy, track them down, & sue them for every penny their worth."
Copyjerk B: "Brillient A! These fools will be filling our pockets for the rest of their lives!"
Copyjerk C: "Why stop there when we can get at the legal purchacers too, by enforcing install limitations? That way after they reach their limit, they'll have to purchace a whole new one."
Copyjerk B: "Brilliant C! & also make it impossible for them to back their purchaces up in case their computers crash."
Copyjerk C: "Yes, & perhaps someday we can go beyond ipods & computers & make it so that DVDs & CDs will only work on one DVD player or boombox."

Pirates have a way of getting past the activation & loading games on torrents, so DRM only punishes paying customers & the game developers. It punishes the developers because the DRM is a huge turn-off that scares away potential legitimate sales. I wouldn't be supprised if it killed off a few game series.

I'm plenty sick of all this copyright bullshit....game install limitations, the inability to retrieve your music if your computer crashes, the inability to back up a DVD that will inevitably be watched till it's worn, things being removed from YouTube & DeviantArt for copyright violation, such as music videos or episodes of old series that were never released on VHS or DVD that thecompany isn't making money on & isn't hurting their sales, the IRAA sueing grandmothers & single parents for thousands per song their children downloaded.

 

[Lord_Seth]

I remember a program I had (not a game) had the choice of either phone or online activation. That seems like it would fix the problems with online activation mentioned in the article.

 

[Beatrix]

I completely agree with this article.
Luckily it doesn't affect me much (yet) since I play console games.

 

[Lord_Seth]

Copyjerk A: "You know what makes even more money than getting a small slice of every legal purchace, B?"
Copyjerk B: "No A, tell me how we can make more money."
Copyjerk A: "Lawsuits. We'll make obnoxious DRM that will drive potential legitimate purchacers to piracy, track them down, & sue them for every penny their worth."

Hrm, I don't know. How much money could they really get from a lawsuit under those circumstances? I mean, when one considers the amount of money and time it would cost to find someone they could sue, then sue them, it doesn't seem a particularly profitable enterprise.

things being removed from YouTube & DeviantArt for copyright violation, such as music videos or episodes of old series that were never released on VHS or DVD that thecompany isn't making money on & isn't hurting their sales,

Now this is something that really bugs me. If they have it on DVD or VHS or have it available anywhere, I can understand them yanking them from YouTube or other sites. But why do they do it if they've provided no legal alternative? It increases their profits by a staggering 0¢, and does nothing but annoy people who were trying to enjoy the videos. Again, I can 100% understand them doing it if they've got DVDs out or you can download them from a service like iTunes, but I don't see any real point to taking them down when it's literally causing no problems to your profits.

Off that note, one annoying thing about online activation, as was pointed out, is the fact the company can go out of business, in which case you're screwed (though this is a problem with shareware as well). I suppose it's maybe reasonable for non-game programs to have things like that, but for games it's really just an unnecessary nuisance.

 

[Elementlmage]

stuff

more stuff

stuff x 1.5

Oh and about the piracy aspect of activation vs cd detection. I will say that cd detection encourages priacy. I know people that have pirated the game just so they don't have to keep swapping disks. Since pirates all have internet connections, online activation would not affect them. If you say that activation encourages piracy because the servers might be shut down, at this point the developers aren't making any money off the games so they don't lose anything if people pirate the game. Cd is drive is a big inconvenience to most people and it just might be enough to push people to piracy.

No offense, but your friends are retarded. You don't have to DL the entire game just to get around the copy protection. Almost every scene group releases the files they used to crack the copy protection and to various site and they are only a few megs in size(I wont tell you where for fear of the ban hammer). That way, you can still purchase the game and have the convenience of having a pirated copy. It still violates the EULA though and if the publisher finds out they could(in theory) deactivate you key/activation.

 

[Arcadia2000]

That & "3 install limitations" are the reason that piracy has gone UP. Fortunately there's also the ability to purchase a used copy of the came for pennies on the dollar at Amazon & eBay. There's even a conspiracy theory about DRM:

Copyjerk A: "You know what makes even more money than getting a small slice of every legal purchace, B?"
Copyjerk B: "No A, tell me how we can make more money."
Copyjerk A: "Lawsuits. We'll make obnoxious DRM that will drive potential legitimate purchacers to piracy, track them down, & sue them for every penny their worth."
Copyjerk B: "Brillient A! These fools will be filling our pockets for the rest of their lives!"
Copyjerk C: "Why stop there when we can get at the legal purchacers too, by enforcing install limitations? That way after they reach their limit, they'll have to purchace a whole new one."
Copyjerk B: "Brilliant C! & also make it impossible for them to back their purchaces up in case their computers crash."
Copyjerk C: "Yes, & perhaps someday we can go beyond ipods & computers & make it so that DVDs & CDs will only work on one DVD player or boombox."

(other stuff)

This. This is the sum of my fears.

Too many other people have said it, so it's my general opinion going down next. Pirating is wrong from an ethical standpoint just like the little white lie is still a lie, but sometimes you feel as if you have no other alternative when you have given people money and expect a product in return. It's not that the old way was better, it's not that there is one shining solution, it's that this is bad for ethical people. You know what I would like to see? A high install limit with the option to send it back to the company when you run out and they send you a brand new one, no strings, and you pay, say, shipping. If I had to have an install limit at all.

The point is that the company assumes you're the bad guy. It sucks when you're on the receiving end when you've been a good, loyal customer and the company gives you the finger. In a sense, they have to, because there are tons of people out there willing to cheat you or at least fool you, if somehow not the same thing, into you giving them something for nothing. (Aka, companies are assholes because pirates exist?) Not that generosity is a bad thing (Teh Arcadia shares! ) and making a profit shouldn't always be the bottom line, but if you're out there to make money you can't let yourself get suckered by every Tom Dick and Harry that comes by.

I don't find CD swapping to be that painful. But that's just me; too many others have disagreed. I'm also not an on-the-go gamer, per se; I have my DS that comes along with my Pokemans and Final Fantasies and Marios. But you know, if I ruined my CD or let my friend ruin my CD or bad luck happened and ruined my CD, you know, I understood that this was my problem, just like it's my problem if I left the milk out on the counter and it spoiled, or my friend left it out, or we lost power and the fridge couldn't do its job. With this... things are different. I don't have many PC games with this issue. I'm primarily a console gamer that likes the occasional MMO or bit of Bejeweled to unwind. My games are only good on my old consoles so long as the consoles work. I'm okay with things wearing out over time. It makes me sad, but you know, as weird as it is to say this about video games, death is a part of life and we all have to accept it.

However, there is something ... it's hard to describe but maybe, "more unfair" than the usual death by age process of a console when we're in the prime of our gaming life with something that's just not that old and suddenly, it's gone. It's the equivalent to a friend getting hit by a car. He's gone, maybe only in the hospital for awhile (no visitors, ICU, you know), maybe not. Maybe it's permanent. When something that's an integral part of your life goes away, you hurt. I suppose one could liken the argument against having our games yanked away to the struggle with the loss of a friend. It's really strange for me to be going there, but it's 5am and apparently I'm either more metaphysical or more fanciful.

I think/agree that having online activation for a single player campaign is BS, and have now come to suspect that yes, the "Pirates, oh noes!"-card is a "Wizard of Oz"-style curtain to shut down other forms of possible profit not directly relating to out-and-out pirating. (We're all allowed our little conspiracy theories, right?) There really does seem be a better way floating just out of reach of our conceptualization. Mr. Young might not have the answers, but opening eyes to the unfairness of the current system is always important. Thank you.

 

[TheMadDoctorsCat]

I do mostly use Steam, and while I don't particularly like that they can halt your access at any time, I do it for the convenience, because I can't be bothered carrying discs around with me.

I used it when I bought Portal because I didn't realise at the time what it was and there was no other option. P-ssed me the f--k off.

Having said that, now that I've actually got it, I think it's great in many respects. My biggest grips is that you have to be online to play a single-player game, and I don't like that it's fairly bloated with features that I won't ever use or need. Do Valve think I WANT to install shopping software on my PC? This is why I don't have iTunes!

In short - it's a good idea but bloated with features that you can't turn off or stop being installed, and Valve should be a lot more upfront about what's included when you first get it.

 

[Skratt]

I personally love Steam for it's convenience, but I must say that almost all DRM is so completely anti-consumer it's not even funny. Publishers have their heads up their ass and are so scared of Red Beard the Pirate I think they actually create a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I look at piracy like this: If you make a game without copy protection, and it get's pirated, then obviously you've lost money. If you make a game WITH copy protection and it get's pirated to the same degree (or more as sometimes seems the case), you are now out what you would have lost anyway PLUS a huge chunk of money spent trying to copy protect. Why is that such a hard formula to grasp? I think I know why: Copy protection companies would go out of business if they were not able to SELL the idea that their copy protection will protect the Publisher's investment.

Is there any way that you can actually PROVE that adding copy-protection to a game ADDS to the sales numbers? I'd really like to hear a Software Copy Protection company's sales pitch, because it must have one hell of a hook.

 

[ReverseEngineered]

Thank you, Shamus, for a great argument against online activation (and DRM in general). Publishers argue that it's necessary and apologists pass it off as being less-evil, but the truth is, it's terrible. In fact, it infringes on many rights.

First, you have to start with the idea that the game you pay for is licensed, not purchased. This is a new idea that came out around the same time as audio CDs -- previously, if you purchased a book, the rule was that you owned that copy of the book and could do what you wanted with it, including resell it. That last part was termed the Doctorine of First Sale.

With audio CDs, we saw the rise of the EULA, which stated that you were not being sold a copy of the album (so the CD was free?), but rather a license to listen to the music on it. That license usually included a list of many things you couldn't do with the music, as well as a list of things that the licensor could do to terminate the agreement. If you read the text closely, it often includes things like, "without warning or reason, we can terminate the agreement, at which point you must destroy that copy." Some licenses even said that the license was non-transferrable, meaning that you couldn't legally sell your copy to somebody else, but without the technology to enforce that, it was mostly meaningless (and certainly didn't prevent stores from buying and selling used albums).

Video games have been using these similarly Draconian and unenforcable licenses for years, but with the advent of online activation, they have finally had a way to enforce the non-transferrable portions. The most obvious way is the limited number of activations: you could only resell it so many times before it would run out of activations. Maybe that wasn't the intention, but it's certainly a result. A less-obvious way is by having a use-once CD key that is then tied to an account. For example, I purchased Age of Conan the day that it came out. When I installed it, I had to sign up for an account on Mythic's servers and enter my CD key. I also had to give my real name, credit card, and come up with an account name and password. From then on, the only way to play the game was using that account -- you couldn't make another account using that CD key.

That's fine, except I'm not allowed to transfer that account to somebody else. The idea of "selling" my account directly violates their terms of service and would result in my account being banned. At this point, it's clear that I have no way to resell the game I purchased, which was terrible considering that I paid $60 for a game that I hated -- a game that I couldn't resell, couldn't return, and otherwise couldn't get back the money that I paid for it.

Of course, you already pointed out that they could also just cut my service whenever they feel like it. They are under no obligation to continue providing service, despite the fact that I specifically paid for a license to use the game. If they take away the service, and I can't use the thing I purchased a license for, isn't that a breach of contract? No, says the EULA, because I agreed that they can terminate service any time. Those sound like unconscionable terms to me.

According to Wikipedia, unconscionability of a contract requires two things -- inadequate consideration (that is, one party gets the better deal), and a problem with the process of the contract being formed (no choice, one party having a superior bargaining position, etc.). That sounds an awful lot like what happens every time I "license" a game. I don't know the terms of the contract until I've already agreed to it (known as a shrink-wrap license, which isn't enforcable in many places), I'm at a severe disadvantage to negotiate those terms (every publisher uses the same terms, so I have to accept them or go without), and there is little consideration (I may not be able to use the product at all, or at least for the amount of time I expected, and should I not have a use for it, I'm not even allowed to resell it).

Online activation, and DRM in general, are symptoms of a larger problem -- corporations are finding loopholes to screw customers out of their rights. The doctorine of first sale is there to ensure customers can recoup value from things they no longer need, but that only applies to a copy of a work, not a license to use a copy of that work, so now everything is just a license. Even a license doesn't mean anything, because that license can be terminated at any time, and as long as you agree to it (not that you have a choice). Laws like the DMCA mean that, even if you still have a legal license to use the software, if their technological measures that are used to enforce the license fail, you aren't legally allowed to override them. As games like WoW have demonstrated, this can be a convenient way to make a person pay for their purchase multiple times over.

If we want to stop DRM and all the other ridiculous hoops we have to jump through, we need to go to the root of the problem: the degrading of consumer rights through legal loopholes and corporate lobbyists.

If you're Canadian, you can start by fighting against legislation like Bill C-61 that attempts to further allow DRM and contracts to override the consumer rights already established by other laws. You can speak out at the Canadian Copyright Consultations and make it clear to the public that this affects us all in ways many of us don't even realize. We need to balance the needs of corporations against the needs of individuals, and as long as the corporations are the only ones being heard (which is already true for the Toronto Town Hall in the Canadian Copyright Consultations), then only the corporations will get what they want.

 

[theultimateend]

Some people say activation fights piracy. Some say it has no effect. We can't settle this debate, but we can demonstrate that all DRM systems have the SAME effect on piracy. All systems are always cracked, no one system takes statistically longer than any other, and pirates all go through the same steps to obtain the game, regardless of the original system used.

Links or it didn't happen. C'mon, bring out the stats that show that no one system takes longer than any other. Go ahead. Bring out the stats that say World of Goo was pirated just as fast as Bioshock. Oh wait.. you can't? Because it ain't true. Bioshock took three days. World of Goo was instant.

Making stuff up to bolster your argument isn't a good way to do it.

Spore hit the torrents days before release:

http://kotaku.com/5045120/spore-cracked-and-torrented-already

I did not think I should need to provide links when your common sense should have served. Remember that what DRM promises to do is physically impossible and violates information theory:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/experienced-points/5930-The-Impossible-DRM

Even in the best case scenario - even if you were right, which your aren't, you're arguing for a DRM system which denies you ownership of the game FOREVER so that it can be safe from the torrents for hours or days.

And really, what does 48 hours matter in the grand scheme of things. Who cares if it takes "The Scene" 5 min to crack Goo and 2 days to crack Bio Shock or Spore or what ever; the end result is the same. They just wasted real valuable money and their game got pirated regardless of how intrusive/painful/expensive/idiotic their copy protection was.

Shamus: Yes, yes, yes, we all know that DRM doesn't stop piracy. Nobody's arguing that, and that's not what you claimed. You claimed that DRM makes no difference. Except the difference between 0-day and 3-day availability is the difference between a certain number of people pirating the game, or going out to purchase it. How many? I don't know. As I said, my experience has shown me only 1 so far. Then again, I try to avoid associating with people who I know pirate things. So if even in my limited experience I've found one example, I'd be willing to wager that's part of a larger pool.

As for denying the ownership forever, I agree with that problem, and indeed have already said that your other points are valid. The point I take issue with, and the myth & misconception that I'd like to see halted, is this idea that DRM does absolutely nothing, because that's simply not true. Concentrate on the true statements, and get rid of the false ones so that your opponents have nothing to shoot down.

Element Image: In the grand scheme of things, the difference between 0-day and 3-day is that initial burst of sales at the retail stores. Sales which convince the stores to pick up more copies of the next game from the developers. Remember, retail holds games for a *very* limited window. 2 weeks after release the game is probably off their shelves and they don't care if it's pirated or not. But during the brief time it's there, those sales all contribute to whether that developer gets another deal. So really, it makes a huge difference, as the key time to prevent piracy is during that initial period.

2 weeks after release?

What games are you purchasing? Or what retailer are you buying from?

As it stands the only reason cracking software takes longer than day 0 is because for pirates there is no outcry desire to get it on day 0.

If there is a market for something there will be a supply to that market. People who are skeptical will not buy a game on day 0 anyways. I never buy games on release day unless I played a very convincing demo, neither does anyone I know. The whole point of pre-order bonuses is to get people to buy the game before the bad reviews hit.

You'll find that games who have a high likelihood of being epic sellers will be far less extreme in their pre-order bonuses than games that aren't looking all that interesting. Well ok...I've found...you might not find that .

The amount of sales you 'might' gain on day 0 are not going to offset the amount of sales you lose from folks knowing that you are using DRM. Since the SPORE incident many cash ridden gamers check the back of the box before buying their games.

If you want to stop piracy just make quality games at earnest prices. No other method will be more efficient than that.

 

[PublicNuisance]

Shamus continues to impress me with his articles. I couldn't agree more with him on this point. I don't mind Steam but I think places like GOG have a much better system because they actually let me download and keep the file.

 

[Aurora219]

I do actually find the whole debacle quite amusing. It's like trying to fend off the circling sharks by pouring your old, fetid blood stocks overboard. It just attracts the attention of even more consumers. I for one have had such problems with a few games I already OWN that I've ended up downloading and cracking them to make them workable again. I'm sure as hell not going to lose any sleep over pirating something I've already bought but they've pulled the rug from under me.

 

[PublicNuisance]

I do actually find the whole debacle quite amusing. It's like trying to fend off the circling sharks by pouring your old, fetid blood stocks overboard. It just attracts the attention of even more consumers. I for one have had such problems with a few games I already OWN that I've ended up downloading and cracking them to make them workable again. I'm sure as hell not going to lose any sleep over pirating something I've already bought but they've pulled the rug from under me.

I haven't yet but really it's just a matter of time unless you never format your hard drive.

 

[rated pg]

So you buy the game, if you get screwed on the online activation DRM then you go download a pirated version. You paid for a software license, so what do they care so long as they made their money off you?

 

[SilentScope001]

I did not think I should need to provide links when your common sense should have served.

Reliance on "common sense" is a stupid form of argument. But, if you insist...

The "common sense" argument I hear from DRM activists is that the longer it takes to "crack" the game, the more likely impulsive buyers will decide to buy the game rather than just wait for the crack and download the pirated version. When you have a game that gets cracked in 2 days, that's 2 days where the game can only be bought legally. The longer it takes for the crack to be made, the longer it will take for the rest of the Internet to find it, and the longer it takes for illegal versions of the game to circulate. Thus, DRM does in fact increase sales, recovering a portion of money that would have been lost due to piracy.

You may disagree with this argument, but it's about as valid as your "common sense" argument. The point of DRM, according to these activists, is not to stop the committed pirates, but to stop the more lazy pirates, who are irriated at the DRM and will decide to just buy the game rather than wait. In that case, it's "working".

If you want to stop piracy just make quality games at earnest prices. No other method will be more efficient than that.

WRONG. World of Goo.

You can't stop piracy. But you must contain it.

 

[The Extremist]

And here I thought I was virtually alone on the Internet with this opinion. Every time I dare raise my voice on the issue somewhere I get drowned out by the fanboys and activation-apologists. I've found maybe one person on Reddit that feels the same way I do on the topic.

Regarding the general DRM argument that's happening on the side, I love how people cite World of Goo as "the most pirated game of all time" and bring it up as the poster-child of what happens when you don't lock down your game. Not referring to SilentScope's post above which I mostly agree with.

From what we know 80-90% piracy rate is actually normal on PC currently. I only know of two data points (one game with DRM and one without) in the public domain and both reflect numbers in that range. No large games publisher or DRM manufacturer is producing statistics to confirm or deny the effect of copy protection and DRM on piracy rates.