Ultimately, no DRM is preferred (especially when you consider some games are already being pulled off digital stores, possibly never to be seen again). But it's a compromise if a publisher only uses a reasonable DRM method, one that does not cause issues for paying customers, to keep the pirates at bay (pun not intended) long enough for the first few weeks of sales. It's just too bad some publishers go too far.
- Always online - Yes for MMOs and game streaming since they, by design, need constant internet access. Hell no for single player modes.
- Online authentication at regular intervals - It better be very long intervals. What's Steam's for offline mode? I've seen everything from 2 weeks to months. 2 weeks might be too short for some people (vacations, lost internet at home).
- Purchase valid for X downloads - That's kinda crappy, and usually services have you make an account to begin with.
- Unlimited downloads, but account bound - It seems to work for most PC games and console digital distribution, as long as they give you a way to move assets to a new system if the old one breaks or is stolen.
- Performance hits (minor to major) - Nope. If it's taking up enough resources to noticeably affect performance on otherwise capable hardware, that's another sign of a publisher who cares only about money and has no care about even delivering a decent product.
- Content locked behind one-time-use key - That's worse than "good for X downloads."
- Must have disc inserted to play - Fine by me (and most console users who won't let go of discs[footnote]You can pry my consoles' discs from my cold, dead hands.[/footnote]). I just haven't seen it in ages since copying discs (and sharing/generating keys) is trivial and many PCs are being built without the drink coaster drive.
I got a couple new DRM models to add too:
- Purchase limited to X installs - This is lame as well. What really counts as an install when some DRM has considered changing your video card (or something even simpler) as a new install. I think Spore was one of the games that did that.
- 3rd party DRM on a distribution client with existing DRM - No, just No. If the service you are selling your game on doesn't have DRM that suits you, take you games off of it. Ubisoft, you should either get access to Steam's user base, or your own DRM, not both.
- Always online - Yes for MMOs and game streaming since they, by design, need constant internet access. Hell no for single player modes.
- Online authentication at regular intervals - It better be very long intervals. What's Steam's for offline mode? I've seen everything from 2 weeks to months. 2 weeks might be too short for some people (vacations, lost internet at home).
- Purchase valid for X downloads - That's kinda crappy, and usually services have you make an account to begin with.
- Unlimited downloads, but account bound - It seems to work for most PC games and console digital distribution, as long as they give you a way to move assets to a new system if the old one breaks or is stolen.
- Performance hits (minor to major) - Nope. If it's taking up enough resources to noticeably affect performance on otherwise capable hardware, that's another sign of a publisher who cares only about money and has no care about even delivering a decent product.
- Content locked behind one-time-use key - That's worse than "good for X downloads."
- Must have disc inserted to play - Fine by me (and most console users who won't let go of discs[footnote]You can pry my consoles' discs from my cold, dead hands.[/footnote]). I just haven't seen it in ages since copying discs (and sharing/generating keys) is trivial and many PCs are being built without the drink coaster drive.
I got a couple new DRM models to add too:
- Purchase limited to X installs - This is lame as well. What really counts as an install when some DRM has considered changing your video card (or something even simpler) as a new install. I think Spore was one of the games that did that.
- 3rd party DRM on a distribution client with existing DRM - No, just No. If the service you are selling your game on doesn't have DRM that suits you, take you games off of it. Ubisoft, you should either get access to Steam's user base, or your own DRM, not both.
That's all DRM has been successful at, slowing the hackers down long enough for the majority of sales to made when the title has peak interest (ie. the title's launch window). Someone will always be trying to crack/ or be searching for a cracked copy of any game, no matter the price. Intrusive and restrictive DRM schemes, such as always online single player, just make the piracy all the more appealing, even for someone who did pay for the game to begin with.
The only type of DRM that can stop cracked copies completely are the types that do put heavy emphasis on server processing, online multiplayer, game streaming, games that really do need the cloud. (So, not Sim City 2013. Also, I don't think a single player game needing the cloud for basic function will exist for years.) (Even then, it would not surprise me if I one day read a news story on someone hacking into a publishers' servers, copying all of the game data, and (after weeks of coding) setting up their own private server to play an online game for free. That's a far out story, but I doubt it is impossible.)
The only type of DRM that can stop cracked copies completely are the types that do put heavy emphasis on server processing, online multiplayer, game streaming, games that really do need the cloud. (So, not Sim City 2013. Also, I don't think a single player game needing the cloud for basic function will exist for years.) (Even then, it would not surprise me if I one day read a news story on someone hacking into a publishers' servers, copying all of the game data, and (after weeks of coding) setting up their own private server to play an online game for free. That's a far out story, but I doubt it is impossible.)