"This DRM is Orwellian!"

[BloatedGuppy]

Yeah. Fictional people. Real people are getting genuinely irritated by DRM. We aren't comparing to Cultural Revolution China or invoking Goodwin here.

People are indeed invoking Godwin's Law. We had someone pull out the "First they came..." poem in a previous thread about DRM, and I'm sure you know the genesis of that.

We've had people compare the stand against DRM to Rosa Parks.

We've had people say the fight against DRM was "their generation's war".

I realize it's not everyone, but (for some reason) this is clearly an emotional issue for some people, and their first order of business when discussing it is to start smashing the hyperbole button with both fists and never stop.

I actually have a fairly negative reaction to DRM, despite the fact being always online really doesn't affect me in the slightest (save for those times when they can't keep their servers up...EA I am looking in your direction), but I have an even stronger negative reaction to unchecked hyperbole and stupidity. It makes me want to buy every DRM ridden game ever made, and write long, floral letters to publishers about the merits of DRM, just to piss these people off. Which is not a sensible reaction, but a good barometer of how fucking ridiculous I find it to have people comparing the anti-piracy measures on video games to events that resulted in the deaths of millions of people.

The gaming community likes to fancy itself as a collection of nerds and closet intellectuals. They can start demonstrating it by coming up with some better analogies, and developing a sense of perspective.

How many more great video game developers are we going to lose before we, as gamers, start standing up to companies like Electronic Arts and demanding respect from them?

Simply not purchasing something is not "Taking a stand". I don't buy Pepsi. I don't like it. That doesn't mean I've "taken a stand" against Pepsi. It just means I exercised my rights as a consumer to not buy a product I didn't want. I also don't browbeat my friends and neighbors to not buy Pepsi due to their disgusting predilection for making a soft drink I dislike the taste of. I just don't buy it. I ignore Pepsi, and Pepsi ignores me.

Do feel free to exercise your rights as a consumer to not buy things you don't want. If you feel the need to romanticize it as "taking a stand", however, I'm going to quietly comb you into the same pile with all the other excitable lads who have so little drama in their lives they feel the need to frame their dislike of a software publisher's business practices as a heroic struggle.

 

[DoPo]

snip

Then pray tell what would YOU consider 'taking a stand' against something you dislike be?

I can't speak about him, but if you ask me, it'd be something that actually helps the cause you're taking a stand for. Let's assume you don't like always online DRM - not buying a game that has one doesn't tell the publisher anything, however if you actually contact them, that would be more of an accomplishment. If a hundred people don't buy the game the publisher still wouldn't get any idea something is happening. If thousands of people don't buy it, then, at most, the publisher will notice a decrease in sales. A decrease they can blame on anything they like, including the developers for not making a game people want. However if thousands of people contact them and say exactly what they find wrong with the game, then that's steering events in the direction your stand favours.

 

[Tom_green_day]

Gamers overreacting? Hell, that's a new one.
However you do realise George Orwell wrote a paper about DRM games? It's worth giving a shot.
When I'm tired I'm not as witty with my sarcasm. I just sound stupid.
EDIT: Apparently the always-on DRM is to stop piracy. I applaud that. I hate piracy, and will not go off on a tangent, but if it turns out this reduces piracy on games then I'd be fine with them doing it on other games too. In fact, there are some games that have had always-on DRM for a long time and people don't really care. TF2, I'm thinking of you.

 

[The_Lost_King]

I've never heard DRM called Orwellian. I have heard it called Draconian, is that similar?

 

[nexus]

Yet another instance where people try to encourage others to look at the micro instead of the macro. "Just focus on this one thing guys, and you'll see it's not what you think it is!" When you pull back and look at the landscape that is Corporate ownership, "intellectual property", the melding of corporate and state (aka Fascism), then it becomes more of an issue.

I'll tell you what.. Very simple rule here. If a developer or publisher actively releases games that portray nothing other than modern war propaganda, then I will consider them as part of "the state". The same is expected as such if Iran were to make a video game condemning the west.

People give more of a shit about how you use such terms rather than their real-world implications. When all else fails, and you are powerless against your perceived oppressors, then you go ahead and get pissy over semantics arguments with fellow peoples.

Myopic world view bullshit. /semirant

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

Just for once I'd like to see someone use the word 'Orwellian' to mean anything other than 'police state'. Orwell was a fantastic writer who made some very astute points across years of fiction and essays: if you read 'Politics and the English Language', for instance, you'll notice he predicted the rise of bureaucratic weasel words and postmodernist jargon. But of course, if someone says: 'This paper is positively Orwellian,' I can only assume they aren't referencing how it draws its vocabulary from the centre of the Ladder of Abstraction.

 

[DoPo]

there are some games that have had always-on DRM for a long time and people don't really care. TF2, I'm thinking of you.

Do not confuse online games with always online DRM. Team Fortress 2 is an online game because you need to play it with other people. Well, actually that's not correct for a while now, since you can play offline against bots.

snip

Then pray tell what would YOU consider 'taking a stand' against something you dislike be?

I can't speak about him, but if you ask me, it'd be something that actually helps the cause you're taking a stand for. Let's assume you don't like always online DRM - not buying a game that has one doesn't tell the publisher anything, however if you actually contact them, that would be more of an accomplishment. If a hundred people don't buy the game the publisher still wouldn't get any idea something is happening. If thousands of people don't buy it, then, at most, the publisher will notice a decrease in sales. A decrease they can blame on anything they like, including the developers for not making a game people want. However if thousands of people contact them and say exactly what they find wrong with the game, then that's steering events in the direction your stand favours.

Using Sim city as our example here as its topical.

Complain about the stuff on their public forum? The topic gets locked and buried or deleted. Send them a private email? They just ignore it and say "Thousands of people play and enjoy the online connectivity of SimCIty!" (Almost direct Lucy scumbag Bradshaw quote) Buy it and complain and you get mocked by fellow gamers.

Issue: Always-Online DRM for games that should have offline options.
Gamer Response: ***** and moan about it, but still buy the damn game.

Yeah. These are certainly the responses of level-headed, mature people.

Dont buy it and complain and you are told "well you just dont get it!" or "You didnt spend any money on it you have no right to judge!" (I am too lazy to look up our local EA rep Thrikeens posts on the subject)

So really, there is no way to win, some kiddo will always find a way to belittle your decision or it will be flat out ignored.

But not buying a game and claiming "I take a stand" makes no sense. It's just like BloatedGuppy's situation with Pepsi. I don't have a car, does that mean I've taken a stance against them? I also don't buy yoghurt, have I taken a stance against that? There are lots of things I don't buy but that means absolutely nothing in the long run.

Unless you actually do something you aren't "taking a stance" - not buying a product is avoiding it at best, nothing more, but it could be less. What exactly do you hope would happen if you don't do anything? Somebody would come and say "Hey, that random person didn't buy our product, gee, we'll just make it more suitable for them because we can read minds" - is that it? I don't see people tripping over to improve cars and yoghurt to exactly my tastes and needs, so I'm willing to guess they won't do it. And I don't actually expect them to do it, either.

Unless you actually do something that pushes things in your favour, how do you expect them to change at all?

 

[Sandjube]

I've never even seen someone call anything Orwellian in my life, so....

I have heard people call DRM Draconian, however. many, many times. Mostly on this forum.

 

[Zealous]

Well I'd assume that the majority of them are using figurative language. You know, that thing where you don't actually mean what you say, it's just exaggerated for effect.

Either that or they're just idiots. DRM may be a shitty way to not get people to pirate games, it may be intrusive and in some cases have the capability to remove your ownership of a product you paid for, but yes, it's not on the same level as a police state that brainwashes an entire population and blatantly lies to them about the outside world (NORTH KOREA COUGH COUGH) in a dystopian future.

Captcha: "Swag on". Oh no! They got Captcha, run! Save yourselves!

 

[Olas]

In defense of OP I don't think Orwellian necessarily means 1984/police state/big brother but could just be any kind of general denial of freedom or truth no matter how small or mundane in accordance with George's fears and beliefs.

That being said, DRM isn't like censorship. The truth isn't being withheld it's just being made more complicated to get access to.

 

[Jedi-Hunter4]

DRM, as of right now, gets in the way of playing video games. In 1984, people fucking died. DRM causes frustration and possibly crying for some people. But in 1984, the main character becomes a starving skeleton whose teeth are easily pulled out near the end of his life. One situation is bad, but the other situation is 1984. One of these situations truly is Orwellian. Can you guess which one?

(btw, sorry if this doesn't fit in gaming discussion. I wasn't sure if this would go in off-topic, since it deals specifically with gaming, just not about any specific games.)

Totally agree with you, when I saw the title and thought you were pushing that idea my immediate thought was "well that's distasteful and short sighted". Anybody who thinks Orwellian is a good adjective to describe DRM needs to get a better grip with the English language.

The term "Orwellian" refers to the popular culture version of 1984, which doesn't include most of the things you mentioned.

Sorry but no it doesn't, could go into detail on what it does refer to but it's referencing "George Orwell" and his works as a whole it's just it's often linked with 1984. Orwellian attitudes could be used to describe a number of the themes explored in his works.

I've never heard DRM called Orwellian. I have heard it called Draconian, is that similar?

So when referring to DRM they are fairly similar, some people just seem to get butthurt over the use of Orwellian because they think people are referring to 1984 in its entirety.

Not really for me it feel's like someone is slamming my head against the wall with sheer disdain, as people who use word's like Orwellian to describe the restraints they feel DRM places upon them are part of the blind pop culture you see everywhere these days, misusing language in a vain attempt to sound knowledgeable. Taking a very complex term (in terms of the scope that is covers) and applying it to something so trivial, it's literally how ignorance is spread. It's also the kind of misuse witch has led to the reason why if you ask the average person what "Orwellian" infers they will just say "oppressive" and perhaps mention 1984.

I don't even agree with all the views George Orwell held and thus had such a strong effect upon his works (although I can sympathize why some where so extreme as he grew up on the back end of an era where there were still true empires with terrifying power). But the social themes he explored and the subject area's he explored for the most part are questions every individual should ask themselves at some point and think about, perhaps then we wouldn't have such bland "we're pretty much all the same politicians" and such blatant greed and corruption in sectors like banking. Not enough people take social responsibility for whats going on around them and are happy just to plod through life. So diminishing a word that SHOULD carry very strong connotations and meaning to describe DRM is just totally idiocy in my opinion.

On another quick note, Draconian doesn't really makes sense either, isn't it meant to describe cruel or overly harsh punishment? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/draconian?s=t

Seriously get out and read some books people, rather than just looking things up on wikipedia.

 

[n00beffect]

'It's simplicity itself, Watson!' No really it's simple - DRM is the first world equivalent of the Holocaust, to some people. Okay... That sounded, terrible, firstly because the Holocaust DID happen in the first world, and secondly... ugh, let me elaborate.

You know how you (probably) have that one friend, who's (probably) white, and bitches about everything? And that one time that same friend broke his keyboard out of sheer rage, 'cause he was pissed at you/someone else for beating him at some game or whatever, and then he went on to cry for an hour that his mommy never loved him, even though said mommy has to be in rittalin now in order to remain marginally sane because of that same friend of yours and his 'outstanding' character? Remember that one, single, singular occasion when that friend couldn't get the console/pc/whatever he's into (which is probably everything shiny and sparkly)he wanted, and he went on to claim the world was over for him forever, and 'ever and ever' and how everything was unfair and/or against him? Well, guess what - he meant it. People like that exist and they are spoiled, idiotic simpletons with the brain capacity of a fucking thread-worm, so they haven't even the slightest iota of an idea what 'Orwellian' means or what it refers to. They heard it somewhere in a review they happen to fall upon, or on some forum and now to them 'Orwellian' means bad, and nasty.

These people and their little, insignificant quibbles are called first world problems and, in my opinion, shouldn't even have their opinion registered as human activity, but rather as the strange sounds made by a new, devolved breed of animals. Hey! What could be some interesting name for this new breed?

 

[The Ubermensch]

Some one said Orwellian, Its time for my Cyberpunk Copypasta

Spoiler

Nearly every large metropolis now has its own second life of location-based game layers; whole buildings are wrapped in screens. There are ads for video games on video billboards, and ads on billboards inside of video games ? sometimes even ads for other video games.Virtual Graffii is overlaid on the environment by portable computers. Anarchists and revolutionaries organize via encrypted virtual networks, And, really, anyone with the know-how can buy designer drugs or refined plutonium on secret websites using an experimental decentralized online currency.

Teenagers with smart phones wander the streets, wearing on them computers rivaling the most powerful consumer models from a decade ago. These youths wander around, compromising networks discretely from their phones, wreacking havoc and making a killing for themselves scanning other people's RFID Embedded credit cards and dumping the funds through multiple online bank accounts, while corporate executives plan the overthrow of state governments, with fascism creeping into politics and unmanned robots hovering in the skies. The hobos wander the rail tracks with backpacks full of movies and a laptop.

Police have come to fear the technology of protestors they suppress. Three letter government agencies plot increasingly intricate ways to monitor the population, from unmanned drones to city-wide CCTV installation to the questionably legal hacking of private CCTV networks and the use of facial recognition databanks to track people everywhere they go in the physical world while projects like Trapwire monitor everything they do online. New Brain-machine interfaces allow sensitive information like bank account and PIN numbers to be extracted form a person's brain involuntarily.

In the midst of the surveilance state, society begins to stagnate and the gap between the economic and political elites and the city-dwelling lower class widens into a gaping chasm. Hackers and whistleblowers risk life and limb to expose the activities of the surveilance state and expose the dangers of the powerful multinational corporations, travelling from hovel to hovel with backpacks full of high tech equipment just one step ahead of the authorities they oppose.

Cyberpunk didn't die, it became reality.

DRM is a minor symptom of the cyberpunk dystopia we now live in, but it could still be considered Orwellian

 

[The_Great_Galendo]

Nitpicky, but Soma is from Brave New World, not 1984.

Thanks for pointing that out. It was bothering me that I didn't remember that part of the story, since I've read the book more than once. Though drugging your populace in order to control them better also seems pretty Orwellian.

OT: I think there's a reasonable case for some forms of DRM being called Orwellian. I'm thinking of Origin at its launch, where it was spying on you all the time and sending who-knows-what information back to home base, with the banhammer hanging over people's heads if they said or did the wrong thing. The parallel isn't perfect, of course. It might not even be good. But I can see where the comparison's coming from.

 

[Silvanus]

Agree completely with the OP; it shows a complete lack of perspective.


"Orwellian" is such a misused term altogether, to be honest. A tory here in the UK referred to the plans for gay marriage legalisation as "Orwellian" recently, which was the single stupidest use of the term I'd ever seen.

 

[Jedi-Hunter4]

On another quick note, Draconian doesn't really makes sense either, isn't it meant to describe cruel or overly harsh punishment? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/draconian?s=t

Seriously get out and read some books people, rather than just looking things up on wikipedia.

Words evolve ya know, they tend to do that whether you think its idiocy or not.

And no, Draconian is being used properly
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/draconian

Draconian DRM is overly harsh and cruel DRM, like Always online kicking you if you lose contact with the server, or locking you out of your game if you change your videocard

Fair enough was just unsure on Draconian.

On the topic of Orwellian its an adjective they don't very often change their meaning. It would be like saying the word "blue" has changed it's meaning because people start calling the colour green, blue because they have failed to grasp the meaning of the word.

Besides it's more of an academic term, hence why it carry's connotations of intelligence and it's frequent misuse. I mean surely you can see my point that it's a word that should carry allot of weight with it and that in a world where we really should be thinking about some of the issue's that Orwell covered it's disappointing to see people oblivious to it's true meaning and throwing it around at such trivial issues.

I mean when a word that should be making people think of worrying issues like if their civil liberty's are being protected or if the people who represent them truly have their best interests at heart is being used to describe restrictions placed on a Luxury item that the vast majority of the world does not have access to, can you not see where my WTF is wrong with the world? kind of attitude is coming from?

I mean as gamers, sure we are interested in issue's that effect out gaming, but if someone wants to describe something Orwellian maybe they should have a look at some of the worrying legislation many country's have attempted to push through in terms of widespread internet monitoring, rather than an issue which is mainly a "this pisses me off, I don't feel X company respects me as a consumer" which the simple answer is, fine vote with your wallet and write a respectful formal email email to the company (unlike so many that are posted to the net where the writer thinks being sarcastic about the product will really win over the company), if everyone does that the company's wills start to take note. Maybe write a forum post encouraging others to do the same, or even to really encourage people write a base letter that people can sign and send off to join the effort (which makes me laugh as I've yet to see someone ACTUALY put some effort in an try an formally and respectfully organize.)

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

Game devs are shipping cages of anti-piracy rats now?

Well damn....

 

[bug_of_war]

The CCTV cameras and forced exercise regime in 1984 didn't kill anyone, but they infringed on your freedom to do what you like, and were generally very obstructive to living your life. In that sense the DRM is Orwellian as it automatically assumes you've done something wrong and need to be monitored.

To be fair, piracy is a thing that is wrong. So while it's crap that the people who aren't being wrong are being punished, I think we need to figure out a way (which is likely impossible, but 1000 years ago flight seemed impossible) in which piracy can be stopped or minimized.

I wouldn't call it Orwellian, but it definately isn't a nice thing to have.

 

[infohippie]

Playing a game with a DRM is totally optional. Nothing about what Big Brother commanded in 1984 was optional. Until Valve forces me to install Steam and has me answer the question "Who is your God and Savior?" with "Gabe Newell" every morning there is absolutely no basis for calling DRM Orwellian.

Hasn't your region got that update yet?

 

[5mj7R7yf4Dwr3gdZyyu9PeGNwYjlNrjzuh3iTXQG]

Everyone else has pretty much said what I wanted to say. George Orwell did write Nineteen-Eighty-Four but he has written much more, usually non-fiction in which despotic rule, oppression of the proletariat, excessive surveillance and punishment disproportionate to crimes are all common themes in his work. (Orwell's common message was that our nations will drift towards these conditions unless we are vigilant to prevent it.)

Considering persistent-online DRM, the Origin Terms-of-use that allow them to crawl through your computer's data and, essentially, log and extract what they want. The termination-without-refund of Origin, Xbox LIVE and PSN accounts without explanation, review or accountability, Terminations for such things as expressing an opinion on a forum, yeah I'd say some of the practices of the Game Industry, many of which are related to DRM, are Orwellian.

At this point there are games I'd like to play that I'm not playing because of disproportionately imbalanced EULAs or unacceptable DRM, typically (in my case) offline single-player games for which there are online verification processes that may get sunsetted at the whim of the publisher. The less the publishers trust the consumers, the less I (and many consumers) are inclined to trust the publishers.

238U