Poll: To DRM or not to DRM.

[Soopy]

It seems to be a very contentious issue within the gaming world. But I must wonder, is the concept of DRM totally unacceptable in its entirety or has initial iterations of the concept been so poorly thought out and implemented as to have permanently set the user base offside?

With the announcement of the Xbox-One, we've seen waves of fury resonating throughout the gaming communities, nearly all of which is directed at the method of control decided upon by Microsoft. Many claim that DRM should be done away with in its entirety and end users be given a totally accessible unrestricted copy of the product they're purchasing. While in theory this is fantastic and I agree wholeheartedly, unfortunately in the real word it doesn't really work. It's a fact that piracy exists (which as far as I am aware is the original instigator for the advent of DRM) and it is a fact that people will buy software second hand instead of purchasing a new copy of a product.
All of which does contribute (in a how ever small increment) to the profit margins of developers and publishers.

My questions are;

Is DRM the answer?

Should developers and publishers change their business habits to address the issues they're facing, in a method that doesn't penalize the legitimate customer and if so, how?

Should we, as consumers, accept the fact that as a collective we are, at least in part, responsible for the current gaming climate?

If you were at the fore front of gaming development, how would you combat this issue in a fashion that would benefit both yourself and the user?

 

[Tom Waits' hat]

I don't think DRM is the answer, but it's a temporary fix. In my opinion DRM is a byproduct of the current gaming climate by the action of gamers. Whether DRM will actually work or not, a company is going to protect its products anyway. Just like pirates are not going to stop pirating games.

I think instead of blaming the "greedy corporation" we the gamers should take some responsibility in the creation of this DRM monster.

Also, I like corgi.

 

[Toxic Sniper]

I will not tolerate DRM on a closed platform.

Developers should focus on cutting costs in both development and offices. We don't need celebrities voice-acting characters, we don't need graphics, and we don't need tacked-on server and multiplayer development costs on a game that didn't need online multiplayer in the first place (Hi, Last of Us). Digital delivery is another solution that prevents piracy and cuts costs in shipping and retail, but digital delivery can't work unless prices are slashed for the consumer.

We should accept the fact that we are partially responsible, and we should not let that affect our consumer rights. It doesn't matter if the games industry burns in flames because of my stubborn nature, I am not giving up my right to sell a physical copy of a game I own.

I would definitely look at digital delivery at an affordable price (Prevents resale while also not dissuading those scared of prices) and cutting costs in game-making; it's incredible how many costs come from voice-acting, advertising, cgi cutscenes, aka the chaff.

 

[Soopy]

Are low cost purchases of digital media an acceptable compromise for the loss of preowned games and trade-ins?

 

[Windcaler]

At the end of the day DRM hurts consumers so it is a bad business practice in and of itself. I understand that devs want to protect themselves from piracy, however they've bought into the idea that every pirated game equals one lost sale and thats just not true. Some people who pirate end up buying the game either because its a good product or because the piracy itself was a form of marketing, some people who pirate will never buy the game but some of them will never play it again. There are many outcomes to piracy but devs and publishers have fooled themselves into thinking that its only bad for them

Theres also the fact that most DRM gets cracked within a few days. Even Simcitys approach of requiring server emulation was cracked within a few weeks. From a business standpoint it is a waste of time and resources to add in DRM when the same time and resources could be put toward making a better game. Its even worse to treat your paying customers like thieves because of the actions of a few.

Some DRM programs even have their own difficulties. For example I have a friend over in Siberia who could not join me in Dark souls for some jolly cooperation because Games for windows live literally would not allow him to legally buy the game due to its region locking nonsense.

Here is the point Im often starting to make in these discussions. In no sane society do you punish innocent people for the actions of another. That goes against some of the oldest ideals in the united states justice system but thats what DRM does. It punishes paying customers for what a few pirates do by making DRM get in the way of our gaming.

The entire DRM practice needs to end once and for all but as long as Devs and publishers continue to fool themselves into thinking its an effective anti-piracy tool then I dont see it going away without a massive consumer push back. I hope the xbox one will be the catalyst to make that happen

 

[KarmaTheAlligator]

and it is a fact that people will buy software second hand instead of purchasing a new copy of a product.

Only because the price of the full game is so prohibitive in the first place. That's the reason Steam works so well, because they have massive sales so people don't even think about buying second hand. After all, who wants to get something that is in questionable condition when they can get the same thing in pristine condition for the same price or less?

 

[Soopy]

and it is a fact that people will buy software second hand instead of purchasing a new copy of a product.

Only because the price of the full game is so prohibitive in the first place. That's the reason Steam works so well, because they have massive sales so people don't even think about buying second hand. After all, who wants to get something that is in questionable condition when they can get the same thing in pristine condition for the same price or less?

If Microsoft announced that the games for Xbox-one were going to RRP for $20. Would that excuse the DRM measures in place?

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

Depends what DRM you're talking, really. In general it tends to manifest in the form of features that waste the time of paying customers and essentially provide pirates with a better game by its removal. It also buys into the "punish everyone because some people don't behave" mentality, which I think shouldn't be applied to anything, really. In terms of piracy, piracy isn't nearly as big a problem as I had previously believed and as is popularised by publishers, and furthermore there is no way to know how much piracy is people who would have bought a game legitimately but never did thanks to piracy. Other kinds of piracy are piracy of convenience, people who have bought the game and would prefer to not have the DRM, piracy of why not, people who would not have bought or played the game at all, and piracy for demo purposes, people who are like the previous group except that they do not play through the game and instead buy it if they like it. Additionally, some pirates who did not intend to purchase the game then purchase it because of their experience. So basically I don't buy the piracy excuse, because among the already reasonably small portion of the playerbase who are pirates, it is impossible to know how much of that turns out to be detrimental.

The other thing is used games. Games are a product, however much publishers would rather see them become a service. When I'm done with a game it should not have less value except as you would normally expect with any other physical product. Lower prices are because you don't have quality assurance (or because you live in Australia and can buy games new from any other country for a massive discount compared to what you get locally). When a game is sold, one person is playing the game. When a game is resold, one person is playing the game. This is not an unreasonable thing to assume of a product, that it should be used by multiple users over its lifespan. I don't know why the gaming industry thinks its products alone should be exclusive to a user. The other thing is that games with multiplayer components, which can be justified as a service albeit one that should be expected for no extra cost, degrade over time as the playerbase diminishes.

In the case of Steam, I am willing to forgo my ability to resell games I buy because they are so ridiculously cheap at sale prices. This is a simple case of the savings made by buying through Steam being greater than the difference between the cost of a new game and the value when resold, and what's more, I can always play it. I see that as acceptable only because of Steam's excellent service.

I could go on but tl;dr: Piracy is a bullshit excuse, used games have a right to exist and DRM is both unfair conceptually and counterproductive in practise.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

and it is a fact that people will buy software second hand instead of purchasing a new copy of a product.

Only because the price of the full game is so prohibitive in the first place. That's the reason Steam works so well, because they have massive sales so people don't even think about buying second hand. After all, who wants to get something that is in questionable condition when they can get the same thing in pristine condition for the same price or less?

If Microsoft announced that the games for Xbox-one were going to RRP for $20. Would that excuse the DRM measures in place?

With Xbone levels of DRM? (ie Kinect, 24 hour check-in, Massive limitations on trade-ins etc...) 2 bucks max.

 

[Soopy]

Depends what DRM you're talking, really. In general it tends to manifest in the form of features that waste the time of paying customers and essentially provide pirates with a better game by its removal. It also buys into the "punish everyone because some people don't behave" mentality, which I think shouldn't be applied to anything, really. In terms of piracy, piracy isn't nearly as big a problem as I had previously believed and as is popularised by publishers, and furthermore there is no way to know how much piracy is people who would have bought a game legitimately but never did thanks to piracy. Other kinds of piracy are piracy of convenience, people who have bought the game and would prefer to not have the DRM, piracy of why not, people who would not have bought or played the game at all, and piracy for demo purposes, people who are like the previous group except that they do not play through the game and instead buy it if they like it. Additionally, some pirates who did not intend to purchase the game then purchase it because of their experience. So basically I don't buy the piracy excuse, because among the already reasonably small portion of the playerbase who are pirates, it is impossible to know how much of that turns out to be detrimental.

The other thing is used games. Games are a product, however much publishers would rather see them become a service. When I'm done with a game it should not have less value except as you would normally expect with any other physical product. Lower prices are because you don't have quality assurance (or because you live in Australia and can buy games new from any other country for a massive discount compared to what you get locally). When a game is sold, one person is playing the game. When a game is resold, one person is playing the game. This is not an unreasonable thing to assume of a product, that it should be used by multiple users over its lifespan. I don't know why the gaming industry thinks its products alone should be exclusive to a user. The other thing is that games with multiplayer components, which can be justified as a service albeit one that should be expected for no extra cost, degrade over time as the playerbase diminishes.

In the case of Steam, I am willing to forgo my ability to resell games I buy because they are so ridiculously cheap at sale prices. This is a simple case of the savings made by buying through Steam being greater than the difference between the cost of a new game and the value when resold, and what's more, I can always play it. I see that as acceptable only because of Steam's excellent service.

I could go on but tl;dr: Piracy is a bullshit excuse, used games have a right to exist and DRM is both unfair conceptually and counterproductive in practise.

Good post, your point is quite clear.

I can sympathize with your point of view, but what would you do to negate the need for DRM? Quite clearly there is a need, as it exists.
They do need some form of DRM, because unfortunately piracy does happen, whether or not pirates were ever going to purchase the game or not is largely irrelevant, you have to assume they would have or you're not going to last in business long.

 

[Doom972]

I don't think that we are responsible for this. If developers can find some sort of DRM that actually prevents piracy and causes little to no inconvenience to the player, I'll be fine with it. I admit that this doesn't seem possible at the moment.

 

[Soopy]

I don't think that we are responsible for this. If developers can find some sort of DRM that actually prevents piracy and causes little to no inconvenience to the player, I'll be fine with it. I admit that this doesn't seem possible at the moment.

What inconvenience does a system such as Steam, afford the user?

I am not disputing your point, simply trying to find the meat behind it as I feel these things are not dissected thoroughly enough.

 

[Doom972]

I don't think that we are responsible for this. If developers can find some sort of DRM that actually prevents piracy and causes little to no inconvenience to the player, I'll be fine with it. I admit that this doesn't seem possible at the moment.

What inconvenience does a system such as Steam, afford the user?

I am not disputing your point, simply trying to find the meat behind it as I feel these things are not dissected thoroughly enough.

Steam causes minor (acceptable) inconvenience, but doesn't really do much against piracy. The games can be downloaded and played just fine as long as the service works properly, and it doesn't always work perfectly (though I would admit that it became much faster and more stable this year).
I like Steam. I think that the sale prices and availability make up for the relatively minor DRM.

There are other kinds of DRM that do actually make me angry:

Always Online - Unless it's an MMO, there's no reason for having to deal with this bullshit. Once the servers are shut down, the game is useless.

Copy protection - I don't see why I shouldn't be able to make a DVD/CD image that I could use on my laptop, which doesn't have a DVD/CD drive.

 

[Soopy]

I think steams fight against piracy is a fight of conscience. You can steal it and get it quickly, or you can an at times pay a rather small fee and get it legitimately. It doesn't squash piracy in the instant, but I think is or will work over time simply by endearing its self to the user base. Basically by treating consumers well.

Personally I feel that Always online DRM is very poorly thought out. It shows a complete disregard for the end user and that contempt should be shown for the publisher in return.

 

[KarmaTheAlligator]

and it is a fact that people will buy software second hand instead of purchasing a new copy of a product.

Only because the price of the full game is so prohibitive in the first place. That's the reason Steam works so well, because they have massive sales so people don't even think about buying second hand. After all, who wants to get something that is in questionable condition when they can get the same thing in pristine condition for the same price or less?

If Microsoft announced that the games for Xbox-one were going to RRP for $20. Would that excuse the DRM measures in place?

No, because the XBone is seriously too limiting with its present DRM of either 24 hours or every hour if on another box (why is that even necessary?). That's, once again, an area where Steam is much, much better.

 

[Soopy]

and it is a fact that people will buy software second hand instead of purchasing a new copy of a product.

Only because the price of the full game is so prohibitive in the first place. That's the reason Steam works so well, because they have massive sales so people don't even think about buying second hand. After all, who wants to get something that is in questionable condition when they can get the same thing in pristine condition for the same price or less?

If Microsoft announced that the games for Xbox-one were going to RRP for $20. Would that excuse the DRM measures in place?

No, because the XBone is seriously too limiting with its present DRM of either 24 hours or every hour if on another box (why is that even necessary?). That's, once again, an area where Steam is much, much better.

Would the XBox DRM be acceptible if they simply removed the 24hr check in?

 

[KarmaTheAlligator]

and it is a fact that people will buy software second hand instead of purchasing a new copy of a product.

Only because the price of the full game is so prohibitive in the first place. That's the reason Steam works so well, because they have massive sales so people don't even think about buying second hand. After all, who wants to get something that is in questionable condition when they can get the same thing in pristine condition for the same price or less?

If Microsoft announced that the games for Xbox-one were going to RRP for $20. Would that excuse the DRM measures in place?

No, because the XBone is seriously too limiting with its present DRM of either 24 hours or every hour if on another box (why is that even necessary?). That's, once again, an area where Steam is much, much better.

Would the XBox DRM be acceptible if they simply removed the 24hr check in?

There would be no DRM then as you could keep it offline, which would be fine.

 

[Soopy]

and it is a fact that people will buy software second hand instead of purchasing a new copy of a product.

Only because the price of the full game is so prohibitive in the first place. That's the reason Steam works so well, because they have massive sales so people don't even think about buying second hand. After all, who wants to get something that is in questionable condition when they can get the same thing in pristine condition for the same price or less?

If Microsoft announced that the games for Xbox-one were going to RRP for $20. Would that excuse the DRM measures in place?

No, because the XBone is seriously too limiting with its present DRM of either 24 hours or every hour if on another box (why is that even necessary?). That's, once again, an area where Steam is much, much better.

Would the XBox DRM be acceptible if they simply removed the 24hr check in?

There would be no DRM then as you could keep it offline, which would be fine.

There would be though. Being digital media in its self is a form of DRM. Not being able to trade it, sell it or otherwise tamper with it would be just as much a form of DRM as any steam game.

 

[Starik20X6]

As far as I can tell, the main reasons piracy occurs are as follows:

- The pirate doesn't have sufficient income to spend on luxuries such as games
- The pirate disagrees with the business practices of the publisher/developer
- The pirate is a shithead who would rather steal something than pay the creator
- The product is not available/not conveniently accessible in the pirate's area

There would be plenty more reasons why someone might pirate, but those were the first that came to mind. Now, the way I see it, only one and a half of those methods is the player's fault, with the rest being prompted by the developer/publisher.

So we've established that piracy isn't entirely the player's fault, now who are the people actually affected by DRM? Only, and literally only the legitimate paying customers. See, as soon as a game is able to be pirated, the pirates have stripped the DRM from the game, so they're no longer affected by it. Thus, the only people who have to deal with being subjected to these virtual pat-downs are the people who have already proved they bought it legitimately, as evidenced by the fact that they're there to be checked at all!

So what's a publisher/developer to do if not use DRM? If possible, try to price your game a little lower. Make your product easily accessible to everyone. Don't be a shit to your consumer base. You'll never be able to squash piracy completely, but you can take some of the teeth out of it by meeting the consumer half way.

 

[KarmaTheAlligator]

and it is a fact that people will buy software second hand instead of purchasing a new copy of a product.

Only because the price of the full game is so prohibitive in the first place. That's the reason Steam works so well, because they have massive sales so people don't even think about buying second hand. After all, who wants to get something that is in questionable condition when they can get the same thing in pristine condition for the same price or less?

If Microsoft announced that the games for Xbox-one were going to RRP for $20. Would that excuse the DRM measures in place?

No, because the XBone is seriously too limiting with its present DRM of either 24 hours or every hour if on another box (why is that even necessary?). That's, once again, an area where Steam is much, much better.

Would the XBox DRM be acceptible if they simply removed the 24hr check in?

There would be no DRM then as you could keep it offline, which would be fine.

There would be though. Being digital media in its self is a form of DRM. Not being able to trade it, sell it or otherwise tamper with it would be just as much a form of DRM as any steam game.

True, but being used to Steam, I wouldn't mind too much, as I never sell or trade in games anyway. Although, yeah, there would be the case of not being able to just lend it to friends, which so far has never been an issue on console if you had the physical disc... Damn, but that thing is annoying. OK, I retract my previous statement, I'm not OK with that kind of DRM on consoles, no matter what. And before you ask why it's OK on PC, it's because you don't have to use Steam when gaming on a PC.