Why online authentication?

Recommended Videos

Idsertian

Member
Legacy
Apr 8, 2011
513
0
1
I was reading the "Origin, why?" thread and a thought occurred to me. Or rather, a memory of something my dad said not too long ago. Doesn't fit there, so I thought I'd make a thread for it.

This is more a Steam thread than anything else, but it can apply to other things too. Why is there this fascination, nay, obsession, in the industry with "online authentication" and "always-on DRM" and other such bollocks? (Excuse my French) Take this example:

John Doe goes to GAME, sees The Orange Box for PC. Picks it up, sees on the back of the box "internet connection required for play". "Ok," thinks he, "no problemo." Makes his purchase, takes it home, installs both the game and Steam and is happily playing away within however long it takes him to download all the required updates. Fine and dandy.
However, after a bit, both of Mr Doe's children see him playing X/Y/Z and decide they want a piece of the action too, but both want their own friends lists and achievements, so they need their own accounts. Now we've run into a problem: Mr Doe now has to buy two new copies of TOB for each of them, a product he has already legally purchased (lets forget for a moment that TF2 is now free).
Forking out extra money for something you've already bought is bad enough, but now what happens when Mr Doe's ISP craps out and he's left with no internet? Now he's paid for three copies of games that no-one can play.

This is about the only thing I disagree with about Steam. This just does not seem right, either charging people multiple times (particularly parents) for products already purchased and almost wilfully neglecting to provide ample protection against loss of "teh interwebz". Yes, the ToS almost certainly covers this in some way, but that doesn't answer the question of why one person has to buy 3 different copies of the same thing for 3 different people using the same machine.
Could you imagine the outcry if M$ tried to do that with Windows or MSOffice? "Oh, you've got to buy multiple copies of the product for every person who wants to use it on the machine." Or how about if you went into HMV (or whatever your local movies and music retailer is) and you took, say a copy of Iron Man to the counter. "One copy of Iron Man pl0x." "Certainly. That's blah-de-blah-de-blah. Oh erm, how many people will be watching it?" "Well, me, er a couple of mates maybe..." "Well you'll need to buy two extra copies then."
Yeah that's going to go down about as well as proposing to bring your gay boyfriend home to meet your homophobic dad.
Also, I do realise there is a "Offline Mode" to Steam, but if you don't activate it before signing off for the day, you're buggered if your net cuts out. Or the Steam network dies. (has such a thing ever happened?)

But lets take this scenario from the not so distant past of 2000.

A different John Doe to the first one walks into GAME, sees Deus Ex on the shelf (zomgz! cardboard box nostalgia!). Picks it up, reads the specs and establishes that yes, his PC will run that quite happily. Buys it, takes it home, installs it and plays it. Him and everyone else who uses the machine, on the same machine, without anyone having to purchase extra copies of anything. The internet died? Not a problem, keep on uncovering conspiracies. Little Johnny wants play? Simply hop on and there you go kiddo, no fanny-ing around with logins or anything else. What causes this magic? Simply having the CD in the drive.
Or replace DX with Homeworld, whereby the magic is attained simply by entering a code during installation and leaving the disc in the tray.

I guess my point is this: What was wrong with the paradigm we had then? Why this change to a more inconvenient, troublesome and inherently flawed system than before? Why have we got to download this, sign up for that and stay connected at all times when we didn't used to before? Even if I go out and buy a physical copy of a game today, I can almost guarantee that I will be pretty much forced to sign up for this, that or the other crap just to play, never mind getting updates and patches. It can't be "piracy", as everyone knows that that hasn't really changed one way or the other over the years, so that is not an excuse or a reason.

Your thoughts please Escapist.

tl;dr: What was wrong with CD verification, why must we be signed up and online at all times?

EDIT: Don't take this as an anti-Steam thread, it isn't. You come here to flame me or Steam, you'll be tasting the wrath of the mods, so leave your attitude at the door please.
 

Miles000

is most likly drunk righyt noiw!
Apr 18, 2010
897
0
0
In short. Piracy...

Except the solution sucks.
All it does is penalize the honest customers, while the pirates take an extra few days to make a work around...
 

Idsertian

Member
Legacy
Apr 8, 2011
513
0
1
Miles000 said:
In short. Piracy...

Except the solution sucks.
All it does is penalize the honest customers, while the pirates take an extra few days to make a work around...
That's not really a valid reason though. "Piracy" (I hate to call it that, but lets leave that discussion for another topic) doesn't really affect the sales of any particular game measurably anyway, as anyone who downloads the game for free likely wouldn't buy it anyway. I've been there, done that myself, for a variety of different reasons. It's the whole "home taping is killing the music industry" argument again.

But I agree with you, the solution is bad. Honest customers are getting penalised for it, which sucks. Big time. I just can't see the logic behind it when it doesn't really stop the problem. Name a DRM, it's been cracked. In fact, I know of a site (Russian, unsurprisingly) that specialises in cracking Steam and getting every game available there running for free. Their download lists are really quite expansive and there's tons of 3rd party stuff for people who really don't want to use Steam. There's even a cracked online community, for things like CS:S and the like. My point being that not even that giant is safe. Not to mention all the stand alone versions of games you can find on any regular torrent site (yes, even Valve's own stuff).

The question is, what, if anything, are we the gaming public going to do about it?
 

Miles000

is most likly drunk righyt noiw!
Apr 18, 2010
897
0
0
Idsertian said:
That's the thing. Every time there is an outcry, their 'new innovative solution,' only seems to get worse.
Which in turn, continues to propel.... 'unlawful acquisition'...?
Which makes things worse again...

Giving people who pay more freedom with the game they paid for is never going to hurt sales.
It would only make more people happy to pay for a product.

[sub]Possible incomprehensible ramblings... Am distracted, sorry :s[/sub]
 

Idsertian

Member
Legacy
Apr 8, 2011
513
0
1
Exactly, but when you have idiots in charge of things at companies like EA, Ubisoft and Activision, things just get worse and worse. I love Steam, having used it for quite awhile I've gotten used to everything it offers and I love how they treat their customers to free stuff and sales, but their licensing/DRM model really needs working on.
 

saucecode

New member
Jul 30, 2011
263
0
0
The DRM thing is quite a pain. But it truly is to fight the piracy and such. Why else would a compay force a DRM always online thing to play, other than to make sure no one its playing the game illegally? They're not helping anyone but themselves, as they want the few extra crumbs that is left on the plate that is, how ever many sales its getting. Even if the drm is stopping the piracy, i think the idea of always being online is frustratingly inconvienient, and from this, the equivelant sales lost from piracy is lost from people not wanting to try a game that requires constant online connection.

Havent heard much about this whole DRM and "Internet connection required for play" idea, but from what i've heard, its a horrible thing the industry has come up with. Smart, but horrible.