Stalker 2 has... Draconian DRM.

[theheroofaction]

So wait, they expect peoples computers to run a game While downloading it?

They do realize that raises the performance level necessary to play the game by a shitload right?

And that's just from a performance standpoint.

There's also the pain in the ass factor.

Then they always forget about what happened to the "unpiratable" Spore.
Seriously, you can't make an immovable object or an unbreakable wall. I mean, you'd think these people would remember the Titanic.

 

[WarpZone]

I'm starting to suspect that there's a pattern emerging here. DRM Draconionness = Budget / ((Quality + Reception)/ Competition)

That is to say, if a game is actually good, to the point where the developers and publisher expect it to sell well, they might not fuck the consumer over as hard. If it's a low-budget indie one-off game, they might not even bother with DRM. But if the game cost an arm and a leg to make and the developers finish the crunch and realize that, oh no, it's honestly not going to live up to the hype, they'll throw the most bastardized DRM they can license onto that disk, in a desperate attempt to squeeze the early adopters, since it's the only money they'll ever make on the title.

Good games don't need to worry as much about DRM, because they'll sell once word gets around that, holy shit, this game rocks. Sometimes pirates even buy games even after pirating them, because they played it and decided it was worth the price of admission after all. Sometimes people pirate games they own a perfectly legal disk to, just because the disk contains draconian DRM and they don't want that shit on their system.

So, yeah... Draconian DRM = the developer saying "This game sucks and we know it. The only sales we're ever going to see are from the day one early adopters. The moment this game is cracked, or indeed bought by legitimate consumers, word's going to get around that we completely failed to deliver on the hype, and that will be the sales death of the game. We don't need to worry about whether or not our DRM wrecks the experience for legitimate players because we have no intention of supporting this lemon post-release. Our expectations for our own game are so low, we have nothing left to lose by kicking the consumer in the face."

I mean, you know, just not in so many words.

 

[Alandoril]

The fact of the matter is that policies like that DO NOT deter pirates. They just crack the game anyway. These things put off people who would buy and play the game legitimately were it not the frankly absurd notion of having a single play game requiring a constant connection.

And to those people saying "boo hoo, get better internet", the vast majority of times it's not an individuals connection that is the problem, its the games servers.

 

[AngryPants]

The funny thing though is that the game will be cracked in a matter of days, in fact it may actually turn out to be easier to break than the usual DRM. It will only take 1 purchased copy and some time to download all the missing content then simply rerouting all the content requests to files stored on disc.

By the end of the day people that pirate the game will have a smoother experience compared to all the pain the legal customers will have to go through (lag in single-player game? loading screens that take ages? you name it). That is simply disgusting...

 

[WarpZone]

The funny thing though is that the game will be cracked in a matter of days, in fact it may actually turn out to be easier to break than the usual DRM. It will only take 1 purchased copy and some time to download all the missing content then simply rerouting all the content requests to files stored on disc.

By the end of the day people that pirate the game will have a smoother experience compared to all the pain the legal customers will have to go through (lag in single-player game? loading screens that take ages? you name it). That is simply disgusting...

Yeah unless they update it regularly with fresh content and bugfixes.

pfffffftt... nope, couldn't keep a straight face.

Seriously, it's a sad, sad day when developers take such great pains to guarantee that the pirated version will be a better gameplay experience than the legit version.

 

[munx13]

What the fuck?


Well there goes my purchase...

 

[NoNameMcgee]

I was ready to come in here and as usual tell people to stop whining over something so insignificant as DRM, but the internet connection having to be enabled at all times is the only kind that really does actually bother me. Servers can go down, and if they do, that means you can't progress with your game, so yes this sucks.

I wont be buying the game, but not because of DRM, just because I didn't enjoy the other Stalker games so I doubt i'll enjoy this one unless the gameplay is drastically more streamlined to my tastes. Back to the DRM though, even in this case, its no reason to boycott the game, I mean for gods sake if you wanted to play the game before just fucking buy it and apply one of the cracks that will pop up a week after release (or less). and yes it will be cracked, from the sound if its a case of a group playing through the game once legitimately and finding a way to save the content that gets downloaded and then adding it all together into one big crack. It won't stop piracy for one second and if you're a legitimate customer you can make use of the cracks available to make your experience more pleasant if you want.

Some of you guys make mountains out of molehills. The core game is what you need to be "voting with your money" on; some little pointless annoying frills on the side that might get in the way if you're unlucky are not something worth completely ignoring a game that you may have otherwise enjoyed. The developers spent *a long time* creating the game and maybe a week or two working on this DRM, reward them for the time they spent on the core game you enjoy and post nasty comments on their forums about the DRM if it bothers you so much.

 

[ElPatron]

Oh dear, yet another company tries to save their game from pirating. HOW DARE THEY WANT TO EARN MONEY?

Exactly, how do they want to earn money by punishing the legit players!


If I buy the game, I'm going to pirate it anyway so that I can play when I have no internet.

 

[vrbtny]

Remember AC? They said that it would win over piracy? Few days after release there were offline artificial servers with required content. Just an inconvenience for the good guys.

It was more like a month or two, rather than a few days. But, yes, you make a good point. The only thing Draconian DRM does is hurt the legal players. The illegal ones weren't hurt at all.

 

[plugav]

It seems like something that could potentially cause trouble for players, but it doesn't sound as "draconian" as some of the DRM out there (at least you can sell the game). And unlike most of the DRM out there, it might actually do its job for a few weeks (unlike regular DRM which doesn't work at all). It's still abusive, mind you.

How is it less draconian than other forms of DRM? I mean, sure, other forms of it can be annoying as hell to deal with sometimes, but at least they don't require you to download vital game code as you go, just to play a single player game.

There's DRM out there that locks out content if you buy a used copy or limits the amount of installations possible. At least the system those guys propose doesn't seem to deny the most basic consumer laws.

It's still stupid, of course, for a single player game to be unplayable offline is an extremely stupid feature and I certainly wouldn't pay much for a product this flawed.

 

[Kiju]

"Zomg, I'm not buying this game because it has piracy counter-measures. BAAWWW!"

Please people, grow up. If you don't like this little bit of information, then I suppose it's too freaking bad for you, you'll just have to get it the legitimate way: money.

Half of the people who said they won't buy it because of their DRM probably wouldn't buy it anyway, only to download it from a piracy site later on down the road.

Me? I'm still going to buy the game. I mean c'mon, it's freaking STALKER! One of the greatest FPSRPGs in existence! How can such a little catch actually create such a big hype-crusher? They could always just not make it at all and called it a day. If you want stuff like this to stop, then get off your fat butt and try to figure out a way to stop the piracy.

TL;DR

Be happy with what you're getting: A game made with an obviously high-quality brand name, and stop complaining about little problems.

 

[Chezza]

Reading the quote from the developers I would throw a wild theory that we may be receiving a nice feature for the price of DRM. I do not have any proof to back it up but, knowing the brainstorming many of the mod, game and plain stalker communities come up with it is possible GSC are pursuing an ever updating game.

For example, MMO elements without being one. Perhaps new quests and events are added or altered, maybe you will have the option to join another players game/world (limited players though). Developers aren't stupid enough to throw DRM without being confident it will sell damn well regardless of the hateful move. And before anyone throws the mass piracy in Russia argument just know the game sells more all over the world than Russia itself.

Other minor thoughts to back up my mini MMO theory, it is possible the offer (sometime ago) for the public to create their own missions and submit it to the developers for a chance to be used in the game is to reach their massive mission/quest demand for the ever living, updated mini MMO game??

Think about it

 

[Your Fearless Captain]

You know, the most pirated pc game of all time was Call of Duty: Black Ops at around 4.27 million downloads. Many publishers would love sell that many copies. But STALKER is a bit of a niche game and would never have that many people download it. I don't see why that would think that they would need such an invasive DRM. You don't see Activision use DRM like this. Never thought I would put Activision in a positive light.

 

[sheogoraththemad]

Oh dear, yet another company tries to save their game from pirating. HOW DARE THEY WANT TO EARN MONEY?

I can't really see how screwing over their loyal customers and fans is a good business strategy either, don't get me wrong Developers need to eat too but when I buy a game I want play it anywhere and any time even when the internet is down or something like that. it seems a little unfair when I buy a full priced game and most of the content is on the net.
And I'm not sure but it sounds like this is going to make modding harder too and that a shame.

 

[GideonB]

Me? I'm still going to buy the game. I mean c'mon, it's freaking STALKER! One of the greatest FPSRPGs in existence! How can such a little catch actually create such a big hype-crusher? They could always just not make it at all and called it a day. If you want stuff like this to stop, then get off your fat butt and try to figure out a way to stop the piracy.

My internet is spotty at best, and I don't want to lose progress in a single-player game just because I can't connect to a bloody server

I do buy games legitimately and I'm ok with the always-on DRM if it's willing to go halfway and just do that check-back bs every 2 - 3 days or so instead of requiring your constant connection to a server.
STALKER isn't an MMO. I don't want this always-on crap unless its an MMO or requires online connection THAT badly.

 

[Vern]

Yeah, I have to jump on the bullshit bandwagon. I've bought all three STALKER games retail, and loved them. They were flawed, and at times almost unplayable. But they were great, atmospheric games, some of the best games I've played in the last decade. But really, always on DRM is a losing argument. It will be broken, and quickly. I can't see how it can even be defended. You pay for a physical copy of a game, but the game isn't on the disc, you have to download it while you play it. When I buy a game, I expect to buy all the code required to run that game without relying on an internet connection to play that game.

I'll admit I've bought games off of STEAM, and there's no guarantee of a continuous content provider, but Valve is pretty stable and I'm sure they've made, and continue to make shit-tons of cash from Steam. I don't really think Valve will go belly up soon, and most of the games I've bought were on sale so I'm not out much. Plus they have the backups and offline mode. However, relying on GSC Game World to provide continuous always on internet support for people playing STALKER 2 allowing them to even play the damn game is hard to believe at best. STALKER is a niche market, it's a PC based, CPU intensive, harsh fucking game to play. The games are the harshest games I've ever played. The engine is unoptimized and buggy to say the least, the engine can look beautiful, but can completely destroy a computer that should be able to play it on top specs. But once you get the balance right, they're beautiful, unforgiving games. But it takes time and patience to get them to play right, that's why I wouldn't in my wildest dreams rely on a constant internet connection to download the game while I play. The STALKER series is great, but it's not popular or stable enough to ensure that the servers would be around tomorrow.

I think they're making a bad move here. One of the things that really set the STALKER series apart was that it wouldn't work on consoles. I think the Ukrainian developers had something to do with that. It was hard, depressing, and seemed impossible. And that applies to both the gameplay, and getting it to work. But it was satisfying when it did. DRM is wrong for this game. It's in a market where the people who love the series will, and have bought every installment. The pirates will pirate, that's what they do. It's in the niche where it's not a high demand game in pirate terms, it's not a huge franchise, hence not the most desirable to pirate, although it will happen. Most of the people who've played Shadow of Chernobyl, Clear Sky, and Call of Pripyat and have put up with all the hassle and have been rewarded will buy it. But in steering this course they'll probably lose more sales by adding in intrusive, and almost impossible to maintain DRM.

 

[WarpZone]

Reading the quote from the developers I would throw a wild theory that we may be receiving a nice feature for the price of DRM. I do not have any proof to back it up but, knowing the brainstorming many of the mod, game and plain stalker communities come up with it is possible GSC are pursuing an ever updating game.

For example, MMO elements without being one. Perhaps new quests and events are added or altered, maybe you will have the option to join another players game/world (limited players though). Developers aren't stupid enough to throw DRM without being confident it will sell damn well regardless of the hateful move. And before anyone throws the mass piracy in Russia argument just know the game sells more all over the world than Russia itself.

Other minor thoughts to back up my mini MMO theory, it is possible the offer (sometime ago) for the public to create their own missions and submit it to the developers for a chance to be used in the game is to reach their massive mission/quest demand for the ever living, updated mini MMO game??

Think about it

Interesting theory. You're certainly an optimist. "MMO Elements" as you call them are just content drops. You can do that with DLC (which actually is the preferred business way to do it since everyone pays again for content that should have been in the origial game in the first place.) Massively Single-Player could theoretically justify the server/content paradigm, but I think if there was anything like that in the game, they'd be shouting it from the rooftops as a selling point, not keeping it a secret.

I guess time will tell, but I seriously doubt anything like that will be in the game. Even if it is, I would rather have a single player game that's just actually good and I can just play the goddamned thing offline, on my own terms, without logging in.

Now everyone who was gonna buy Stalker 2, go buy an extra copy of Witcher 2. That'll show 'em.

 

[NoNameMcgee]

I completely disagree with this post, in every way.

The DRM of this game - in fact, almost all DRM - is ridiculous, in my opinion. Sure, it might not seem like a big deal to you, but that doesn't mean it's not a big deal to other people. Just because the developers didn't spend much time on it has no bearing on anything whatsoever. The point is that they're adding a system in that is becoming an increasing problem to legitimate consumers, and we, as consumers, should show the company that we don't like how they're treating us. Sure, it might not be the battle that you would choose, but on't think for one second that other people haven't chosen carefully. This is one of the biggest mountains in the PC gaming industry today.

Well yeah, obviously its a big deal for some people, I kind of realised that. It usually isn't a big deal to me. Isn't the point of debate to show people your point of view in an effort to make them see things how you see them??? I don't really get what you're trying to say there. I was giving my opinion and you have challenged it so now I'll reply, thats how these things work isnt it?

I completely agree that DRM is ridiculous, it never helps against piracy, and it only serves to make the legit customers experience slightly more irritating. I am completely on board with this. However, the key word is "slightly". Any problems that may arise from the DRM? Use a crack. And its likely you won't experience any problems at all. In this case, it depends on their servers (which yes, will make the chances of problems more likely, but still, just use the damn crack if you have any.) It makes no sense to me that someone would decide not to buy an entire game because the technicalities around getting the game to play have a few pointless additions. To me, its like refusing to buy a DVD of a movie you like because the DVD Menu system on the disk is confusing to use. It's just making a big deal out of nothing.

There will always be DRM because a lot of game development studios are run by monkeys, and there will always be cracks to circumvent it. It's really as simple as that.

 

[Robert Ewing]

I've never been interested in STALKR. Perhaps it was for the best. If I had played the first, I'd want to play the second. Now I just don't want to play any of them.