What can Developers & Publishers do to combat Piracy?

[lord.jeff]

Why would we want to combat file sharing? Copying files costs next to nothing and benefits the society as a whole ? we should embrace it. If we can agree that games benefit the society as a whole, like science does, then we should finance it like science, using public funding and peer review. The system has been tested by centuries and we know it works.

It's a funny game we play. It costs nothing to copy something which publishers believe has a value of $60 and yet we accept it and pay what they ask. If I offered to sell you a tomato for $1 and you could easily walk a few feet and get your own for free, would you pay me $1?

I would assuming your the one who grow the tomato or you're giving money to the farmer because that dollar goes to pay for the water, land, fertilizer, equipment, and time the farmer put in to get you that tomato. Same can be said for games sure distribution costs very little by a team of animators, voice actors, programers, writers, an office to put them all in and computers for them all to use, do cost money.

Really, you aren't much of a consumer are you? Do you think about manufacturing and distribution costs when you buy something on sale or clearance?

The role of the consumer is to get the best deal so ask yourself, is that DVD with Skyrim on it and the plastic case really worth $60? We are told that the real product isn't the disc at all, it's the data and that's why it costs the same to buy it from Steam. Well, data can be duplicated an infinite number of times for next to nothing. You pay for the electricity and the media that you will copy it to but that's pennies. So is it really worth $60?

I understand that we have to buy games else there will be no more but it is true that anything that can be duplicated an infinite number of times for pennies is truly worth more than that.

There's a difference between being a smart consumer and being a thief.

Of course there is but if you could duplicate couches for next to nothing and infinitely, wouldn't that have an effect on the value of couches?

What I am saying is that software is a product that has no value except that which publishers put on it and consumers are becoming increasingly aware of that. Look at how Napster changed the way we buy music. CD's were no longer worth $20 when you could copy and distribute them for free.

And steam is providing us with a cheaper alternative right now, games are commonly going on there for less then $20 and I think that's a pretty fair price for most games.

 

[Don Reba]

Why would we want to combat file sharing? Copying files costs next to nothing and benefits the society as a whole ? we should embrace it. If we can agree that games benefit the society as a whole, like science does, then we should finance it like science, using public funding and peer review. The system has been tested by centuries and we know it works.

It's a funny game we play. It costs nothing to copy something which publishers believe has a value of $60 and yet we accept it and pay what they ask. If I offered to sell you a tomato for $1 and you could easily walk a few feet and get your own for free, would you pay me $1?

If the tomato is good, I might pay you $2 to keep growing them. Personally, I donated around $100 to the Vim text editor's charity and some amounts to most of the free software I use on regular basis. One time, I torrented a game made by a small developer and sent him $50 - he said "thanks".

Actually, the public funding idea is not revolutionary. Canada already heavily subsidises the arts. Quebec in particular gives out big tax breaks to game developers.

 

[Epona]

Why would we want to combat file sharing? Copying files costs next to nothing and benefits the society as a whole ? we should embrace it. If we can agree that games benefit the society as a whole, like science does, then we should finance it like science, using public funding and peer review. The system has been tested by centuries and we know it works.

It's a funny game we play. It costs nothing to copy something which publishers believe has a value of $60 and yet we accept it and pay what they ask. If I offered to sell you a tomato for $1 and you could easily walk a few feet and get your own for free, would you pay me $1?

I would assuming your the one who grow the tomato or you're giving money to the farmer because that dollar goes to pay for the water, land, fertilizer, equipment, and time the farmer put in to get you that tomato. Same can be said for games sure distribution costs very little by a team of animators, voice actors, programers, writers, an office to put them all in and computers for them all to use, do cost money.

Really, you aren't much of a consumer are you? Do you think about manufacturing and distribution costs when you buy something on sale or clearance?

The role of the consumer is to get the best deal so ask yourself, is that DVD with Skyrim on it and the plastic case really worth $60? We are told that the real product isn't the disc at all, it's the data and that's why it costs the same to buy it from Steam. Well, data can be duplicated an infinite number of times for next to nothing. You pay for the electricity and the media that you will copy it to but that's pennies. So is it really worth $60?

I understand that we have to buy games else there will be no more but it is true that anything that can be duplicated an infinite number of times for pennies is truly worth more than that.

There's a difference between being a smart consumer and being a thief.

Of course there is but if you could duplicate couches for next to nothing and infinitely, wouldn't that have an effect on the value of couches?

What I am saying is that software is a product that has no value except that which publishers put on it and consumers are becoming increasingly aware of that. Look at how Napster changed the way we buy music. CD's were no longer worth $20 when you could copy and distribute them for free.

And steam is providing us with a cheaper alternative right now, games are commonly going on there for less then $20 and I think that's a pretty fair price for most games.

Skyrim is $60 retail and $60 on Steam. Steam has great sales but the MSRP of a game is the same and that was my point.

 

[lord.jeff]

Why would we want to combat file sharing? Copying files costs next to nothing and benefits the society as a whole ? we should embrace it. If we can agree that games benefit the society as a whole, like science does, then we should finance it like science, using public funding and peer review. The system has been tested by centuries and we know it works.

It's a funny game we play. It costs nothing to copy something which publishers believe has a value of $60 and yet we accept it and pay what they ask. If I offered to sell you a tomato for $1 and you could easily walk a few feet and get your own for free, would you pay me $1?

I would assuming your the one who grow the tomato or you're giving money to the farmer because that dollar goes to pay for the water, land, fertilizer, equipment, and time the farmer put in to get you that tomato. Same can be said for games sure distribution costs very little by a team of animators, voice actors, programers, writers, an office to put them all in and computers for them all to use, do cost money.

Really, you aren't much of a consumer are you? Do you think about manufacturing and distribution costs when you buy something on sale or clearance?

The role of the consumer is to get the best deal so ask yourself, is that DVD with Skyrim on it and the plastic case really worth $60? We are told that the real product isn't the disc at all, it's the data and that's why it costs the same to buy it from Steam. Well, data can be duplicated an infinite number of times for next to nothing. You pay for the electricity and the media that you will copy it to but that's pennies. So is it really worth $60?

I understand that we have to buy games else there will be no more but it is true that anything that can be duplicated an infinite number of times for pennies is truly worth more than that.

There's a difference between being a smart consumer and being a thief.

Of course there is but if you could duplicate couches for next to nothing and infinitely, wouldn't that have an effect on the value of couches?

What I am saying is that software is a product that has no value except that which publishers put on it and consumers are becoming increasingly aware of that. Look at how Napster changed the way we buy music. CD's were no longer worth $20 when you could copy and distribute them for free.

And steam is providing us with a cheaper alternative right now, games are commonly going on there for less then $20 and I think that's a pretty fair price for most games.

Skyrim is $60 retail and $60 on Steam. Steam has great sales but the MSRP of a game is the same and that was my point.

Whats your point? That your to cheap to pay the MSRP, or that your for some reason your unable to look at the indie alternatives. How about this if you can give me a legitimate way to pay for man hours and equipment, don't forget steam, gamestop, and truckers also have to get payed as well, at cost then I'll take your side of your argument seriously.

 

[nyysjan]

1. lower the price (60 to 70? for a game the you can play through over a weekend? not good),
2. increase quality (in gameplay, writing and quality assurance, might seem counter intuitive with the previous point, but bad games won't sell, and might lower the sales of future games)
3. remove DRM (it only encourages people to not buy your game)
4. better box content (we sued to get a ton of stuff in the old days when we bought a game, maps, instruction booklets, miniatures, cheap stuff that would maybe cost a couple ?'s to make, but would definetly give people an extra reason to buy the game instead of download it.

5. And most of all, better PR, seriously, if people hate your guts, they don't want to give you money.

 

[Epona]

Why would we want to combat file sharing? Copying files costs next to nothing and benefits the society as a whole ? we should embrace it. If we can agree that games benefit the society as a whole, like science does, then we should finance it like science, using public funding and peer review. The system has been tested by centuries and we know it works.

It's a funny game we play. It costs nothing to copy something which publishers believe has a value of $60 and yet we accept it and pay what they ask. If I offered to sell you a tomato for $1 and you could easily walk a few feet and get your own for free, would you pay me $1?

I would assuming your the one who grow the tomato or you're giving money to the farmer because that dollar goes to pay for the water, land, fertilizer, equipment, and time the farmer put in to get you that tomato. Same can be said for games sure distribution costs very little by a team of animators, voice actors, programers, writers, an office to put them all in and computers for them all to use, do cost money.

Really, you aren't much of a consumer are you? Do you think about manufacturing and distribution costs when you buy something on sale or clearance?

The role of the consumer is to get the best deal so ask yourself, is that DVD with Skyrim on it and the plastic case really worth $60? We are told that the real product isn't the disc at all, it's the data and that's why it costs the same to buy it from Steam. Well, data can be duplicated an infinite number of times for next to nothing. You pay for the electricity and the media that you will copy it to but that's pennies. So is it really worth $60?

I understand that we have to buy games else there will be no more but it is true that anything that can be duplicated an infinite number of times for pennies is truly worth more than that.

There's a difference between being a smart consumer and being a thief.

Of course there is but if you could duplicate couches for next to nothing and infinitely, wouldn't that have an effect on the value of couches?

What I am saying is that software is a product that has no value except that which publishers put on it and consumers are becoming increasingly aware of that. Look at how Napster changed the way we buy music. CD's were no longer worth $20 when you could copy and distribute them for free.

And steam is providing us with a cheaper alternative right now, games are commonly going on there for less then $20 and I think that's a pretty fair price for most games.

Skyrim is $60 retail and $60 on Steam. Steam has great sales but the MSRP of a game is the same and that was my point.

Whats your point? That your to cheap to pay the MSRP, or that your for some reason your unable to look at the indie alternatives. How about this if you can give me a legitimate way to pay for man hours and equipment, don't forget steam, gamestop, and truckers also have to get payed as well, at cost then I'll take your side of your argument seriously.

My point is that publishers price retail copies and digital copies the same because they say the real value is in the data, not the disc or the packaging. That Steam costs the same as a retail copy (aside from sales) just backs up that point.

So the question becomes, if that data can be so easily duplicated, what makes it worth $60? That is what publishers are fighting in my opinion because they don't have the $60 answer. It's like selling bottled water, you can get it for free and most people do but there are millions made from people who prefer to buy it. Sooner or later everyone will realize what a rip off it is to pay for that which can be obtained for free.

 

[lord.jeff]

Why would we want to combat file sharing? Copying files costs next to nothing and benefits the society as a whole ? we should embrace it. If we can agree that games benefit the society as a whole, like science does, then we should finance it like science, using public funding and peer review. The system has been tested by centuries and we know it works.

It's a funny game we play. It costs nothing to copy something which publishers believe has a value of $60 and yet we accept it and pay what they ask. If I offered to sell you a tomato for $1 and you could easily walk a few feet and get your own for free, would you pay me $1?

I would assuming your the one who grow the tomato or you're giving money to the farmer because that dollar goes to pay for the water, land, fertilizer, equipment, and time the farmer put in to get you that tomato. Same can be said for games sure distribution costs very little by a team of animators, voice actors, programers, writers, an office to put them all in and computers for them all to use, do cost money.

Really, you aren't much of a consumer are you? Do you think about manufacturing and distribution costs when you buy something on sale or clearance?

The role of the consumer is to get the best deal so ask yourself, is that DVD with Skyrim on it and the plastic case really worth $60? We are told that the real product isn't the disc at all, it's the data and that's why it costs the same to buy it from Steam. Well, data can be duplicated an infinite number of times for next to nothing. You pay for the electricity and the media that you will copy it to but that's pennies. So is it really worth $60?

I understand that we have to buy games else there will be no more but it is true that anything that can be duplicated an infinite number of times for pennies is truly worth more than that.

There's a difference between being a smart consumer and being a thief.

Of course there is but if you could duplicate couches for next to nothing and infinitely, wouldn't that have an effect on the value of couches?

What I am saying is that software is a product that has no value except that which publishers put on it and consumers are becoming increasingly aware of that. Look at how Napster changed the way we buy music. CD's were no longer worth $20 when you could copy and distribute them for free.

And steam is providing us with a cheaper alternative right now, games are commonly going on there for less then $20 and I think that's a pretty fair price for most games.

Skyrim is $60 retail and $60 on Steam. Steam has great sales but the MSRP of a game is the same and that was my point.

Whats your point? That your to cheap to pay the MSRP, or that your for some reason your unable to look at the indie alternatives. How about this if you can give me a legitimate way to pay for man hours and equipment, don't forget steam, gamestop, and truckers also have to get payed as well, at cost then I'll take your side of your argument seriously.

My point is that publishers price retail copies and digital copies the same because they say the real value is in the data, not the disc or the packaging. That Steam costs the same as a retail copy (aside from sales) just backs up that point.

So the question becomes, if that data can be so easily duplicated, what makes it worth $60? That is what publishers are fighting in my opinion because they don't have the $60 answer. It's like selling bottled water, you can get it for free and most people do but there are millions made from people who prefer to buy it. Sooner or later everyone will realize what a rip off it is to pay for that which can be obtained for free.

Your first paragraph had it right it is the data that your paying for or the creation of that data. It doesn't matter if that data can be duplicated you still need to pay for it's creation, so I'll ask you again; how do you pay for hundred of man hours and equipment with a free product?

 

[Denariax]

Make games worth buying and stop worrying about some kids with uTorrent on their side. Christ.

 

[Epona]

Why would we want to combat file sharing? Copying files costs next to nothing and benefits the society as a whole ? we should embrace it. If we can agree that games benefit the society as a whole, like science does, then we should finance it like science, using public funding and peer review. The system has been tested by centuries and we know it works.

It's a funny game we play. It costs nothing to copy something which publishers believe has a value of $60 and yet we accept it and pay what they ask. If I offered to sell you a tomato for $1 and you could easily walk a few feet and get your own for free, would you pay me $1?

I would assuming your the one who grow the tomato or you're giving money to the farmer because that dollar goes to pay for the water, land, fertilizer, equipment, and time the farmer put in to get you that tomato. Same can be said for games sure distribution costs very little by a team of animators, voice actors, programers, writers, an office to put them all in and computers for them all to use, do cost money.

Really, you aren't much of a consumer are you? Do you think about manufacturing and distribution costs when you buy something on sale or clearance?

The role of the consumer is to get the best deal so ask yourself, is that DVD with Skyrim on it and the plastic case really worth $60? We are told that the real product isn't the disc at all, it's the data and that's why it costs the same to buy it from Steam. Well, data can be duplicated an infinite number of times for next to nothing. You pay for the electricity and the media that you will copy it to but that's pennies. So is it really worth $60?

I understand that we have to buy games else there will be no more but it is true that anything that can be duplicated an infinite number of times for pennies is truly worth more than that.

There's a difference between being a smart consumer and being a thief.

Of course there is but if you could duplicate couches for next to nothing and infinitely, wouldn't that have an effect on the value of couches?

What I am saying is that software is a product that has no value except that which publishers put on it and consumers are becoming increasingly aware of that. Look at how Napster changed the way we buy music. CD's were no longer worth $20 when you could copy and distribute them for free.

And steam is providing us with a cheaper alternative right now, games are commonly going on there for less then $20 and I think that's a pretty fair price for most games.

Skyrim is $60 retail and $60 on Steam. Steam has great sales but the MSRP of a game is the same and that was my point.

Whats your point? That your to cheap to pay the MSRP, or that your for some reason your unable to look at the indie alternatives. How about this if you can give me a legitimate way to pay for man hours and equipment, don't forget steam, gamestop, and truckers also have to get payed as well, at cost then I'll take your side of your argument seriously.

My point is that publishers price retail copies and digital copies the same because they say the real value is in the data, not the disc or the packaging. That Steam costs the same as a retail copy (aside from sales) just backs up that point.

So the question becomes, if that data can be so easily duplicated, what makes it worth $60? That is what publishers are fighting in my opinion because they don't have the $60 answer. It's like selling bottled water, you can get it for free and most people do but there are millions made from people who prefer to buy it. Sooner or later everyone will realize what a rip off it is to pay for that which can be obtained for free.

Your first paragraph had it right it is the data that your paying for or the creation of that data. It doesn't matter if that data can be duplicated you still need to pay for it's creation, so I'll ask you again; how do you pay for hundred of man hours and equipment with a free product?

I am not paying for the creation of that data, I am paying for the use of the data. People who pay for the creation of the data are publishers. They pay you to make a game. It's semantics really and it doesn't matter because in the end data can be duplicated an infinite number of times and for almost free.

The production cost is irrelevant to price, what people are willing to pay is what matters. You could build a game and lose money or you could make millions off of very little investment (think Minecraft).

What people are willing to pay is somewhat based on rarity. Can I ONLY get the game from you at your price? Well no, because there is no rarity where data is concerned. It can be copied infinite times.

Did you ever stop and think "if we had replicators like they do in Star Trek, wouldn't everything be free"?

 

[zehydra]

Make a great game so that consumers will pay the developer to make more great games.

you know this doesn't work, right?

 

[Matthew Geskey]

Is it really that difficult?

Code in, inside the exe and very sneakily, something that's just slightly annoying, like a little thing that pops up every time you pass a milestone or complete a quest "Hey, we know you pirated, but now you've gotten this far, so if you really like it, would you mind buying it?" as an error message after it ctds. The annoying inventory limit made me buy some stuff from tf2.

Or you could release a demo on release day that, when you reach a certain point, stops you from progressing. You can play all you want before that point, or even replay it or go backwards and explore. But be sure to make it substantial and to make the player want to continue with his character or pursue the plot.

Make a great game so that consumers will pay the developer to make more great games.

you know this doesn't work, right?

Yeah it does. I bought all the Elder Scrolls, Bioshock, and Bastion after pirating them.

 

[Don Reba]

Is it really that difficult?

Code in, inside the exe and very sneakily, something that's just slightly annoying, like a little thing that pops up every time you pass a milestone or complete a quest "Hey, we know you pirated, but now you've gotten this far, so if you really like it, would you mind buying it?" as an error message after it ctds. The annoying inventory limit made me buy some stuff from tf2.

Or you could release a demo on release day that, when you reach a certain point, stops you from progressing. You can play all you want before that point, or even replay it or go backwards and explore. But be sure to make it substantial and to make the player want to continue with his character or pursue the plot.

Is it really that difficult - yes. You code in a call to an annoying program, and a hacker will pause the program at that point and replace the call with a NOP. Of course, he won't take your demo, he will take exactly the full game you sell in retail.

 

[Gmans uncle]

The horrible sad truth...

NOTHING!
literally, there is no way to stop piracy, anywhere, ever.
No one polices the internet, there is no way to stop people from pirating, there is pretty much no way to prosecute piracy. It doesn't matter what you try, it doesn't matter how perfect and un-crack-able you think your DRM is, the hackers will find a way. There's no way out, there's no way to stop it, it's a losing battle.

You cant stop it, but you can work around it.
Think about WHY people pirate...
Your games are too expensive, your DRM is too constrictive, these are things you can fix; SO FIX THEM! lower your prices, remove your DRM (the hackers 'll just crack it anyway), make some nice pre-order bonuses, maybe some free DLC to intice people into buying your game instead of pirating it.
This is called logic people, use it.

 

[Johann610]

Reward legitimate players. Don't make them feel like they might BREAK and STEAL at any moment. Give them Feelies, or something...or instruction manuals that are FUN to read!

 

[Matthew Geskey]

Is it really that difficult?

Code in, inside the exe and very sneakily, something that's just slightly annoying, like a little thing that pops up every time you pass a milestone or complete a quest "Hey, we know you pirated, but now you've gotten this far, so if you really like it, would you mind buying it?" as an error message after it ctds. The annoying inventory limit made me buy some stuff from tf2.

Or you could release a demo on release day that, when you reach a certain point, stops you from progressing. You can play all you want before that point, or even replay it or go backwards and explore. But be sure to make it substantial and to make the player want to continue with his character or pursue the plot.

Is it really that difficult - yes. You code in a call to an annoying program, and a hacker will replace it with NOP. Of course, he won't take your demo, he will take exactly the full game you sell in retail.

That's why you hire a very sneaky coder to make it.

A demo is an alternative to many people who pirate the game to see if they like it, or to see if it will run fine, or but then don't bother to buy the whole game because they already have it. There are games that I regret buying that a simple demo would have fixed.

They could even (through steam) have it download a portion of the game for free, then after playing up to certain point, it would give you a choice to buy it, where, if you did, it would download the rest.

EDIT: They could even require you to play the demo, and if you bought it as a gift, you wouldn't be charged until the person played it.

 

[Don Reba]

Is it really that difficult?

Code in, inside the exe and very sneakily, something that's just slightly annoying, like a little thing that pops up every time you pass a milestone or complete a quest "Hey, we know you pirated, but now you've gotten this far, so if you really like it, would you mind buying it?" as an error message after it ctds. The annoying inventory limit made me buy some stuff from tf2.

Is it really that difficult - yes. You code in a call to an annoying program, and a hacker will replace it with NOP. Of course, he won't take your demo, he will take exactly the full game you sell in retail.

That's why you hire a very sneaky coder to make it.

It doesn't matter how sneaky you are. The hacker won't look for the call in dead code, he will just wait until you make it, and that will give everything away immediately. You can add layers of checks making sure that your other checks are not modified, but all it will do is slow down the attacker. He has the advantage, because you have to prepare all your defenses in advance.

 

[The Madman]

Your games are too expensive, your DRM is too constrictive, these are things you can fix; SO FIX THEM! lower your prices, remove your DRM (the hackers 'll just crack it anyway), make some nice pre-order bonuses, maybe some free DLC to intice people into buying your game instead of pirating it.
This is called logic people, use it.

People in this topic keep saying that but it's not true.

World of Goo, a small indie project completely independent from any major publishers, low price, amazing little game. Averages a metacritic score of 90 with reviewers and 88 on PC with fans. All around great game, amazing soundtrack to boot.

82% of the people who played the game pirated it.

How about The Witcher 2? Amazing packaging, what little DRM was on the packaged version stripped with the very first patch and avoidable entirely if you bought it from GOG. Damned solid game, lots of post-release support, developed by a small studio and obvious a labour of love.

Game has been pirated over a million times according to torrent trackers. RIGHT NOW on Pirate Bay alone there are hundreds of people seeding the game and hundreds more downloading.

Face it, the game could be the best game ever created. An absolute pinnacle in the creative interactive medium, something that would reduce even the most hardened soul to tears and even the most bitter anti-games critic to break down and confess their love for the medium... and it would probably be the most pirated game ever made. Some people genuinely don't care, they really and truly don't and the only way to stop them from pirating a game is not to give them that option.

 

[Matthew Geskey]

They could even (through steam) have it download a portion of the game for free, then after playing up to certain point, it would give you a choice to buy it, where, if you did, it would download the rest.

Smaller, cheaper games that you didnt have to wait as long for was the entire idea behind the Episodic games, though we can all see how well THAT attempt turned out.

I don't think that was inherent to the episodic formula. No one knows why they only made 2. Except for maybe the fact that they can't count to 3.