Therumancer said:
Not to mention the fact that this is yet another idea that relies on making the internet a requirement for gaming. I do not want to have to be online all the time, and without doing it that way, I can't see this idea being practical.
I don't play many game demos and such as it is, but I see this as going in the direction of say Ubisoft's latest DRM scheme. Really it would be nice if the industry would just knock it off given the amounts of money they are making DESPITE their claims of piracy. Either that or if the gaming consumer base would actually stop buying stuff while they keep going with all of this security and what not... instead of whining and then buying it anyway... which is why we're not taken seriously.
Simply put the way how this seems is basically internet connected malware. "Hi guys, why don't you download this demo to try our game, which we've intentionally loaded with self destructive code...".
I can't wait until someone releases a demo like this and makes a mistake (probably some fly by night producer using the tech without fully understanding it) and it winds up eating people's systems rather than just the game.
Overall this is just as mature as game developers intentionally releasing pirate copies of their games loaded with viruses to "teach people a lesson".
There's no internet connection required for any of this demo shenanigans. You play the game, and after X executions of event A, you can no longer do event A. It's not exactly complicated, nor does it require anything even vaguely malware worthy. It's highly likely it won't delete anything, and will instead use the equivalent of an if statement whenever you try to do something.
"If ( num_A_occurs < X ) then *Perform A* else do nothing"
Something like that. I'm sure it will be much more complicated, but that's the basic idea. As long as the number of times you've played through a section is below the threshold, it's fine, but once you exceed it, you will no longer be able to play that section (or you'd lose the ability to finish a race, or you can no longer jump, or any of a hundred other possibilities).
Hopeless Bastard said:
Crap like this is what turns people to piracy.
The entire entertainment industry right now is completely defined by the question, "How much will you pay for what you used to get free?" The standard EULA (included with even console games, these days), legally defines your purchase to little more than an "extended demo." Like others have pointed out, this is more likely to be used on "full products" to promote sequels and expansion packs excuse me, dlc.
A way this might work is an event happens in game that takes away a core feature. Happens all the time as a way to move the plot forward, but instead, you see a prompt explaining your demo of [core feature] has expired and to get it back you're going to pay money for something you already had.
Randomly taking things away from the average person does not prompt "hurp derp, i guess i better buy dat gaem now hi-yuk!" as a response, it prompts, "fuck you, I wasn't done with that yet."
Not even mentioning how much of a joke patenting has become, and how it either needs to be abolished or reformed completely.
1) They're not using it in a full game. It's a free demo, and they're removing functionality over time to make you want to get the whole game. I read somewhere (may have been this article even) where a racing game with this system just removes the ability to complete a race. You can go round the track as much as you want, but it will never actually say "YOU WIN!" anywhere. It's perfectly understandable and might even be a good way to produce demos.
2) How the hell does this turn anyone to piracy? They're presenting a free demo to the player that gradually removes some functionality from the game. If anything, it's being nicer than a normal demo because you get the whole game from the get-go. What you're basically saying is the equivalent of being handed a pizza to sample with all your favorite toppings, then after you eat 3 slices, someone comes in and removes one of the toppings from the entirety of the pizza. So in response you punch them in the face, take the pizza and run off because it's only fair.
Your argument about this leading to piracy makes absolutely no sense.
Khell_Sennet said:
Now what I don't like about this idea, conspiracies aside, is that it wouldn't work. Say you get two hours before things go to shit. That's long enough to beat some games, and not enough time to finish the tutorial levels of others. Hell, on a Metal Gear game, things would start eroding before you're halfway through the intro video. And you can't say altering the erode time per game fixes much. Some people play fast, others obsessively must complete every little sidequest and explore the level to its fullest.
A similar, but superior method I have come across was in Grand Theft Auto (original). Full access to one level (1/6th of the missions, 1/3rd of the maps), but only 60 minutes to play before it quit. Even if you could beat the first mission, you couldn't go further, but it was definitely enough to tell you if you liked the game.
The idea would work fine. From what I understand of the patent, it doesn't work as a function of time. It's based on the number of times you've done action X.
There was a racing example, where at 2 races completed, you had all the tracks open, but at 7 races completed you only had 2 of the four still available. Things like that.
It's perfectly reasonable for a demo. I'd certainly prefer that over "You have 30 minutes to play this game".
