Scars of War - Alternative to DRM

[blatantninja]

Which has done nothing for music piracy, so why the hope for software?

Quite the contrary. They are selling more and more music online each year. You can't compare it to pre-file sharing sales levels as that age is done and gone.

I haven't bought a CD in close to 10 years. Downloads or not (legal or not), I wouldn't be. However, with Amazon's DRM free mp3 downloads (refuse to do business with iTunes due to their DRM), I've probably spent close to $1000 since the program launched.

The lesson from the music industry is that easy access to cheap DRM-free media appears to have co-incided with increased piracy.

Perhaps, but piracy isn't really the issue. The issue is total sales, and cheap DRM-free media has increased online sales. Piracy will never be stopped, only perhaps slowed down, but piracy is independent of the number of users will to pay for a title.

 

[Squeek]

I rolled my eyes at this and just shrugged it off yesterday, and that was a mistake. Here's a response:

You don't need to make a crack for Morrowind that allows you to load every module. You just need to crack Morrowind. Then you can play any module you feel like.

Nope. They're not all compatible, and that was my point, the one I hoped would help you understand. You would need to decide which Morrowind mods were compatible with which, not to mention which ones would make sense with each other. And those mods all come with instructions.

The updates I'm suggesting wouldn't be labeled or come with readme files. Pirates would have to work hard to even identify them, let alone evaluate them all. Even then the game they would get would only fit a single iteration, a response comforming to the sum of one player's choices.

How would it work with your example? Simple, I already explained this, unless your game logic sits on a server it is trivial to crack.

Explaining how you understand the current paradigm is fine but doesn't take the conversation anywhere. Besides, your point about "game logic sitting on a server" is a reference to server-side client-server software, and that has nothing at all to do with my suggestion.

As WoW has made abundantly clear, subscription pricing affords a lot of development work. All MMOs can do is add more and more due to the restrictions of their software's architecture, but single-player applications don't have that restriction. One could be designed smartly and redundantly in clever ways, ways that could make a CRPG intriguing.

 

[kalniel]

Perhaps, but piracy isn't really the issue. The issue is total sales, and cheap DRM-free media has increased online sales.

At the expense of CD sales, hence total sales are down.

 

[blatantninja]

At the expense of CD sales, hence total sales are down.

CD sales are irrelevant. Those sales aren't coming back, DRM or not.

 

[Naked Ninja]

Hi, sorry for the delayed response, work has been madness.

Alright, I can see why you're getting confused Squeek, let me take a moment to explain. I was at work fixing software bugs till 2am last night, so if I make spelling/grammar mistakes, please forgive me.

It comes down to the difference between data files, and the software that runs data files. A data file is a collection of data in some format which tells the software how to present something to the user.

Examples of this :

- Winamp (software media player) : .mp3 file (data file)
- Notepad (software media player) : .txt file (data file)
- Web browser (software media displayer/player) : .html file (data file)
- Windows media player (software media player) : .wma file (data file)

Easy to understand, right? The software is the "record player" and the data file is the "record". Changing the record doesn't change the software. No matter how many mp3s you load into Winamp, no matter what order they are and no matter what they are, the software that is running those mp3s is the same. Not only that, if you crack the software that runs that file, you crack it. Doesn't matter how many data files you load afterward, it's cracked.

What you don't understand is that this is the same relationship as mod files.

- TES (software media player) : .esm file (data file)

No matter how many esm files you loaded into TES, the software that runs them was the same version. If Morrowind was cracked, Morrowind was cracked. No matter how many .esm files you loaded into it, no matter the order. The "record player" has had it's wires fiddled with, regardless of how many "records" you try load into it.

The misconception you're experiencing it that you think data conflicts in loaded .esm files are actual conflicts in software, as in the software has changed and that is why things are going funny. Not so. The software is the same.

Coming back to the record player metaphor, imagine a record player that could play a number of CDs simultaneously. You load one and start it playing, cool. Now you load and play another. If the tunes are "compatible", it sounds harmonious. But if they aren't then it "clashes", the sound/data presented to the listener is in conflict. But it's not the record player that has changed or is in conflict, it's the data being presented to the player. If someone messes with the wiring in the "record player", it doesn't matter whether "the record" playback is conflicting or not. The wires remain messed with.

Do you understand? .esm files are essentially just data files telling TES how to lay out the world and respond to user interaction. TES cunning composites the data by layering each on top of the other to create a single whole. But this method isn't perfect. Conflicts arise in cases like the following :

Mod file A indicates that NPC Bob should wear a red hat. It also adds a Quest where NPC Sally says "Find Bob, he is wearing a red hat".

Mod File B indicates that NPC Bob should wear a yellow hat. It doesn't modify Sally however.

End result : Sally tells you to go look for Bob in his red hat, but Bob isn't wearing a red had, he is wearing a yellow hat. Confusion ensues!

This is why ordering makes a difference in .esm files, if you'd done them in reverse order it would have been fine, the last change to the hat colour would have been the one to take effect, and Bobs hat would have been red.

Do you understand, Squeek? Mod files aren't software patches, they don't work in the same way. They don't stop piracy at all.

However, I feel you might want to argue "well then, why not make them work like patches then huh?". Patches modify software directly and conflicts in patches simply result in the game crashing/breaking horribly. Also, patches need to be applied in the right order. So 1.1 follows 1.2, etc. If you get a 1.8 patch that doesn't require the 1.7 patch to be installed first, it's because the 1.8 patch contains all the changes from the previous patches too. Which means the latest file contains all the changes the pirates need to work it out.

This is why, coming back to Morrowind, people didn't need to crack each mod. They simply needed to crack each expansion, because it was the expansions that actually changed the underlying software. Mods designed for Tribunal often couldn't work on plain vanilla MW, they required changes introduced in Tribunal to run properly. But Tribunal installations could read vanilla MW mods. Because the later version of the software player could read all older data file versions, but not vice versa.

Squeek, I know you really like your idea and it's easier to believe that I simply don't "get it" than that there may be fundamental flaws in your technical understanding, but please take a moment to read what I'm saying here.

Besides, your point about "game logic sitting on a server" is a reference to server-side client-server software, and that has nothing at all to do with my suggestion.

I was trying to explain to you how this type of architecture is the only one that has a chance of directly stopping piracy. Please don't latch onto it and try to imply that I don't get your concept because I tried to explain this.

The updates I'm suggesting wouldn't be labeled or come with readme files.

Sigh, dude, you have a significantly flawed understanding of just what it is that pirates do. The way they crack software isn't dependent on it coming with labels or readme files. Once they understand how the format works it's completely trivial. And they figure out the format by analyzing the way the software runs when it does it's thang. Damn man, do you really think devs are getting their software pirated because they haven't tried such a simple strategy? It barely slows pirates down.

Even then the game they would get would only fit a single iteration, a response comforming to the sum of one player's choices.

No, they would watch how the game alters according to those choices and quickly figure out how the system works. This is how they figure out how to crack anti-piracy schemes, by analyzing differing code paths. It reveals to them the underlying architecture of the system and how to circumvent it.

My dream CRPG would be set in a world full of intrigue and uncertainty where unexpected mystery would creep in every dark place, lore would linger in forgotten ruins, and legacy would embody distinct artifacts that could only be found by reckless opportunists willing to try to cheat death.

The challenge would be to properly perceive and evaluate the endless possibilities of a complex world, one where I had an unclear but certain destiny. Adventure would lie waiting but not be easily found. And the quest to find it would be chock-full of peril.

Each step of my progress through it would face resistance but would be accompanied by a satisfying sense of significance, a feeling that the part I was playing in the vast muddled drama unfolding around me was worthwhile.

Sigh, we all have these dreams Squeek. But there is a difference between imagining them and implementing them.

The RPG I would make would have a constant flow of that kind of hard-to-find good stuff packed inside, waiting to be discovered.

No, it wouldn't have a "constant flow". You imagine it would, because you've never had to implement that. This is why I called it a pipedream, I don't want to be insulting to you but everyone, every gamer and every dev (who are also gamers) have this kind of dream. But please try to consider that the reason you haven't experienced it yet may not be that devs are just closed-minded, it may be because it isn't technically possible at this time.

 

[Squeek]

Ninja, I only cited Morrowind and modders as an example to help you understand my actual point. You're just doing what you always do and that's immediately seizing on something, jumping to the opposite side the supposed issue, and then defending your position. You've missed the point, as usual.

There's no discussing this with you. This conversation hasn't even stayed on topic and, frankly, is stupid. I'm done.

 

[Naked Ninja]

Ninja, I only cited Morrowind and modders as an example to help you understand my actual point. You're just doing what you always do and that's immediately seizing on something, jumping to the opposite side the supposed issue, and then defending your position. You've missed the point, as usual.

There's no discussing this with you. This conversation hasn't even stayed on topic and, frankly, is stupid. I'm done.

I used morrowind as a good explain of how layered, single-world modding works, because it was clear from your discussion on "mod versions preventing piracy" that you don't understand the complexities. An example to help you understand my points, as you say, an example familiar to a good number of RPG fans. Try keeping that in mind and reading it again, please.

As to what "I'm doing", I'm actually remaining fairly patient and trying to help you understand, despite the fact that you're trying very hard to believe I'm just not open to new ideas. At least have the decency not to tell me "there is no discussing this with you" when you started from a position of saying "You just don't get it Gareth" and proceeded to dismiss anything I said as closed-minded from then on. It's fairly hypocritical.

 

[skavenhorde]

Quite the contrary. They are selling more and more music online each year. You can't compare it to pre-file sharing sales levels as that age is done and gone. .

That's exactly what I thought when I read his post about how making music easier to download hasn't helped the music industry. Everytime the news talks about this it's about how making music easier to download and friendlier to their customers has helped save them and increased sales.

Lesson in all this: People want to do the right thing, but if someone has a better version available that is easier (keyword there "easier" not "free") to use and get then the people will go for the more convient one. Makes sense to me. Who wants a version that is harder to use if someone else is making has exactly the same thing but less hassle.

 

[skavenhorde]

NN, I just remembered an article about how Armageddon Empires was successful. Vic Davis did something along the lines of what you're talking about with keeping the customer interested in the game.
http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/leve...-armageddon-empires-indie-success-part-i.aspx

He has so far not just patched up his games, but added two additional packs for download that add a little something to the game. We're not talking huge overhauls here, but just liitle packages that keep the customer (me) intersted in playing it again.

Anyways I thought you might find it interesting since from what I've read you have a similiar approach and it has worked out well for AE.

EDIT: sorry about the double post, forgot to edit this time.

 

[Naked Ninja]

Thanks Skaven, yeah, I read that article, great stuff. I'm looking forward to his next title, the infernal politics one.

 

[Corwin]

Gareth, thanks for all your explanations. I think you expressed your points well. Heck, even I understood what you were trying to say!!

 

[Squeek]

...I'm actually remaining fairly patient and trying to help you understand, despite the fact that you're trying very hard to believe I'm just not open to new ideas.

I've visited a lot of high-tech startups over the years and sat across from their managers, trying their best to explain their company's new approach to whatever technical problem they were solving. And I've been on the other end too, working to evangelize their new ideas. There's a place in the middle, a place where you're lost and you know it, still struggling to get a handle on what you don't yet understand.

We can all relate, I think. Anyone who’s ever been involved with technology, even if it's only having operated a PC, because that’s just how it goes at any level of high-tech involvement.

But that's not what's going on here, and it's obvious. At least it is to me. This isn't one of those conversations where on the one hand someone's trying hard to explain and on the other someone's trying hard to understand. You're staying focused on your understanding of the current paradigm and how it won't do what you think I'd like it to do.

Sorry, but I can't help but see that you just aren't talking about the same thing as me. For instance, how could someone experience all the content in multiple versions of a game by playing one version of it one time through? That doesn't make sense. That's stuck at square one.

Speaking as someone who’s been involved in product development for a long time, I can assure you that anything, and I mean anything, could be created in multiple versions. Of course it could. How could it not? Any individual version would be distinct from the others. That's why they're considered different versions and the reason I’m referring to them that way.

Modifying an existing version is where it gets tricky, and for anything other than software wouldn’t be worth considering. But software is merely code. Altering it is certainly feasible. Any suggestion otherwise would be ludicrous.

How that might work and whether or not it would be worthwhile is another story. I see a conversation there, and that’s why I’ve brought it up so many times over the past couple of years. But it's one we're not having at the moment, not the two of us.

They say in the land of the blind the one-eye rules. Pardon me for not being blind, not completely.

 

[Naked Ninja]

Thanks Corwin, glad I didn't waste my breathe.

I've visited a lot of high-tech startups over the years and sat across from their managers, trying their best to explain their company's new approach to whatever technical problem they were solving.

I'm remaining patient, but if you compare me to management types again I shall become insulted. I am a programmer, not a business person in a suit. I'm an engineer, a scientist. Please comprehend the difference. You are not visiting with a board of businesspeople in suits trying to sell a concept, you are discussing software design with a highly trained, experienced software developer. And the only ground you have for dismissing my points is that you've visited some software dev houses and heard some speeches? Come on.

There's a place in the middle, a place where you're lost and you know it, still struggling to get a handle on what you don't yet understand.

This isn't what this is. This is a layman showing an engineer his cool design for a new rocket ship. And the engineer is patiently trying to explain how his design won't work like he thinks it will because of the physics of gravity and the physical structure of the craft etc. And the guy is responding by calling him closed-minded because he is saying his super neat-o idea for a rocketship will explode when it tries to take off. That is what this is. Please don't try to cover your lack of technical knowledge with grandiose statements.

We can all relate, I think. Anyone who’s ever been involved with technology, even if it's only having operated a PC, because that’s just how it goes at any level of high-tech involvement.

No, someone who has only ever operated a PC has an entirely different understanding of software development to a highly trained and experienced software engineer. Do you think we create software by accident? Like any other scientific discipline, it is through understanding of the principles at work.

But that's not what's going on here, and it's obvious. At least it is to me. This isn't one of those conversations where on the one hand someone's trying hard to explain and on the other someone's trying hard to understand.

Agreed, you aren't trying particularly hard to understand.

how could someone experience all the content in multiple versions of a game by playing one version of it one time through?

The discussion was about how multiple versions of a game won't stop pirates. And how it won't be "multiple versions" at all, it will be the same version with multiple data file mods loaded. Like winamp with various mp3s loaded into the playlist.

Speaking as someone who’s been involved in product development for a long time

Elaborate please as to the specifics of your role. What was your involvement, exactly?

I can assure you that anything, and I mean anything, could be created in multiple versions. Of course it could. How could it not?

Of course it can. You can make many different versions of your "record player". But that doesn't mean they don't all read the exact same type of record, even if there is different music data on each record. But loading up different records/mods isn't going to change that recorder's version on the fly. The type of system you envisage needs a strongly data driven design in order to work. You don't understand why because you don't understand how software works in general. I've elaborated at length but you don't seem to be listening, so....

Any individual version would be distinct from the others. That's why they're considered different versions and the reason I’m referring to them that way.

It's abundantly clear that you don't have any idea what you are talking about and just keep talking about "versions". Ok, try this. Open up a game on your hard drive. Do you see all those files? Executables, dlls, data files? Some of them are core code binaries, some security modules, some rendering libraries, etc etc. These are built in a certain way so that they know how to "talk" to each other. They have an overall design and structure. And each and every file in that folder is, in all likelihood, a different version from it's neighbor. That doesn't change what I'm saying. It's not about what the version of any particular file is. It's about which files are changing and how. You can't just change the overall structure of the base code every time (even re-write the base code), that's like re-writing the game, incredibly time consuming and expensive and driven by human effort, not an automated process. It's an incredible cost for what you're trying to achieve, far more than even the piracy is. It's like having a car with a cd player, and saying you should tear apart and rebuild the car every time you want to change a cd! I'm trying to come up with metaphors which help you understand, so please don't tell me "I'm stuck in an automotive paradigm" or some such, please.

Modifying an existing version is where it gets tricky, and for anything other than software wouldn’t be worth considering. But software is merely code. Altering it is certainly feasible. Any suggestion otherwise would be ludicrous.

See the above example. Yes, it's possible to rebuild the car in a completely original shape (while still ensuring it performs as before) every time you want to change a cd. I'm trying to explain why it's not a good or feasible idea and why the entire "automotive" industry hasn't adopted the plan which is so "obvious" to you.

How that might work and whether or not it would be worthwhile is another story. I see a conversation there, and that’s why I’ve brought it up so many times over the past couple of years. But it's one we're not having at the moment, not the two of us.

I see a man on a crusade, chasing an idea he has, unwilling to listen to anything which might pull him down to earth. I notice that you didn't start off asking how your system could be implemented or asking about the potential issues you'd face. You just climbed up on that podium, stated that I didn't "get it" and began to preach your vision. That's not a conversation, that's you only wanting to hear what you want to hear.

They say in the land of the blind the one-eye rules. Pardon me for not being blind, not completely.

Less poetry, more technical knowledge, please.

 

[Squeek]

I'm remaining patient, but if you compare me to management types again I shall become insulted. I am a programmer, not a business person in a suit. I'm an engineer, a scientist. Please comprehend the difference. You are not visiting with a board of businesspeople in suits trying to sell a concept, you are discussing software design with a highly trained, experienced software developer.

I don't know what your experience has been with high-tech startups, but I've found that they all begin in a development phase where nearly all the employees and the entire management team are engineers and, when appropriate, scientists. You may want to stop and realize that they're folks who obtain startup funding, which is how they afford employees and consultants. I suppose I'm suggesting they have credibility.

As for making a case for myself, no thanks. I'm not even tempted to go there. You're entitled to your opinion, and that's OK with me.

I've spoken my mind, and this has gone far enough, clearly. I'm out. Peace.

 

[Naked Ninja]

(Note : I respond to Ghan below, if you want to skip the arguing and go straight to some productive discussion, feel free to skip the responses to Squeek )


@ Squeek :

I don't know what your experience has been with high-tech startups, but I've found that they all begin in a development phase where nearly all the employees and the entire management team are engineers and, when appropriate, scientists. You may want to stop and realize that they're folks who obtain startup funding, which is how they afford employees and consultants. I suppose I'm suggesting they have credibility.

I worked for one for 2 and a half years. My boss, the manager and owner, was a PHD who'd studied the aurora for years before writing an entire software system by himself (so also a programmer), then starting his own company. The minute you become a manager your technical skills begin to decay and you mind becomes infested with business speak.

But right, returning to this discussion, you said this :

And I've been on the other end too, working to evangelize their new ideas.

So that makes you which, an engineer or a scientist? Or are you just throwing this out there to gain credibility by association? I'll admit it a rather cunning piece of verbal gymnastics, to say "startups are often run by technical, knowledgeable people who evangelize their ideas, and you Sqeek have yourself evangelized ideas for tech startups, so that makes your opinion about the fact that I'm lost in this technical discussion knowledgeable and valid"...but I'm not buying what you're selling.

Speak plainly Squeek, tell me what it is you do and how much experience you have in this field so that we can speak frankly, without verbal smokescreens. I'm guessing not so much, or there wouldn't be the need to dance around so much. But I welcome you to prove me wrong mate.


@ Ghan :

NN - I am more interested on the SP-MMORPG angle: I can see the reservations regarding user created or constantly updated content, but none of that really speaks against server side technology per se. You argue that users use up content too fast, but that is only a problem if you are looking at a subscription model. MMO work on a subscription basis - but I see no reason why SP server side RPG's should work that way, they could be single price, playtime based, or single price plus modular content based. I am honestly confused why we haven't seen such a model yet - do you have an opinion on that? There seem to be a lot of pros:
- server-side content and calculation allow effective pirating control
- sever technology exixsts (MMORPG)
- attractive options to have additional modular content, easily sold and advertised "in game"
- option for advertising (ingame / during startup / etc.) (not that I like the idea!)
- easy to monitor player behavior, log bugs, improve content.
- easier to patch/ update (?)
- Possibility to have dynamic worlds or dynamic elements for additional attractiveness

Actually, I think this is a pretty good idea and I see it coming. You've probably noticed the rise of free to play asian MMOs recently? They offer an entire game world of content for free then make their money via micro-transactions, in game items and "prestige items" like special mounts. And they are making a fair amount of money!

And then you have Guild Wars, once-off cost for an MMO with a lot of the content instanced. And Age of Conan, which actually felt like playing KOTOR for the first 20 levels, the Destiny Quest part. I literally thought at the time that I would pay a small subscription fee to play a game like that, no problem. Unfortunately it became a standard MMO after level 20.

So I truly do believe it possible. Since it uses online technology I don't think it would end up being totally single player, I think it would be more likely to have social hubs where people meet and chat with instanced content around that. In fact that is essentially what a game like Guild Wars is. It simply needs more sp focus.

There are a few barriers though :

1) Tradition. MMOs copy each other more than even FPS. They are a bit more costly to create and maintain so the money-men want return on investment. So they focus on what has been proven to work.

2) Expectation of multiplayer. When you play online, people expect a social experience. Making an online single player experience is a fairly big risk and may fail simply because the online crowd rejects anything they can't play with their friends.

3) Content and Attention Span. This is also fairly problematic. It is more time consuming and expensive to make BG2 style story/quest content than grind based MMO content, and that content lasts for less time. As long as there is enough content people will stay around but online players can be fickle. If there isn't enough to interest them they wander away. You might release something new later but find they simply aren't paying attention anymore.

To counter that I'd say the best approach is mixed content. You could mix story based adventures with dungeon hacks and MMO style content. Add in social group content. Put in arenas so people can play competitively. If you have enough content for people to amuse themselves between releases of the more time consuming story content it may be enough.

Dynamic content could also be a good option, to help flesh things out. But dynamic content is not easy either, to combine two difficult projects into one means that the game has to be that much profitable, just something to keep in mind.

Multiple character saves is also a must. The ability to save your character in a story module, take them off and play in a dungeon hack module, then return to your old save point in the story module, etc.

4) Pricing. This isn't actually that bad, I agree with you that you simply sell content instead of subscriptions, or use advertising as a last resort (although advertising requires a large user base to start being profitable, so not good for startups). The trick is to find the right price point. The asian MMOs that make money like this often do so because people are competitive and seek prestige amongst their fellows. In a more sp experience, that isn't necessarily such a factor (for some players). And we all saw how much outrage there was about Oblivion horse armor, the type of sp gamers you want to attract might reject this. It's a risk.

But I think it's a fairly small risk, honestly. Imagine having a selection of player housing, keeps and wizards labs and suchlike, which you sell for $2-$5. I think many people would whip out their credit cards for that without much problem. I would.

5) Greed. Everyone sees the money WoW rakes in with subscriptions. So everyone wants to get a piece of that. Other, less outrageously profitable ideas may be simply overlooked.

I could even see a relative of Squeek/Benedict's idea working here, easily. Instead of a single world, release an editor which allows players to make and upload NWN-like modules to a content server which people can browse in-game. Definitely do-able, it's a simple extension of the NWN-style content. You could offer cash incentives to any user mod which achieved a certain number of downloads etc. Likewise I can eaily see a "content encyclopedia" where people can submit new items, buildings and monsters for others to use in their modules.

When you're talking a permanently online single-player hybrid with downloadable modules instead of a single world which people are all contributing to, all my objections drop away. Totally do-able. I'd even say that we will see more like that in the future, definitely. Hell, the idea excites me, I may try it myself sometime.

 

[Benedict]

I could even see a relative of Squeek/Benedict's idea working here, easily. Instead of a single world, release an editor which allows players to make and upload NWN-like modules to a content server which people can browse in-game. Definitely do-able, it's a simple extension of the NWN-style content. You could offer cash incentives to any user mod which achieved a certain number of downloads etc. Likewise I can eaily see a "content encyclopedia" where people can submit new items, buildings and monsters for others to use in their modules.

When you're talking a permanently online single-player hybrid with downloadable modules instead of a single world which people are all contributing to, all my objections drop away. Totally do-able. I'd even say that we will see more like that in the future, definitely. Hell, the idea excites me, I may try it myself sometime.

Hah, so I'm not mad! Not completely anyway . . . .

Glad you think it's not a totally misguided idea, but I'm loving your ideas for what you're already trying to do so stick with that for the moment *cracks whip*

When are you hoping for a release anyway?

 

[hishadow]

@Naked Ninja: Nice analogy about the machine-instructions/data relationship. Ultimately, you need technical knowledge to device and understand these machine-level schemes, but being machine-level it seems extremely easy to crack.

@Squeek: You have to conceded that some of your assumptions about your scheme are flawed if you're not talking about client-server. Creating mods (data + scripts) doesn't alter the machine-code of the game. If you want your code to rearrange itself, then that would essentially mean an official game-patch from the developer. That could work with, say NWN2, a game so buggy that it need monthly patches.

Anyway, the closest thing I can think of that collaborate your idea, would be a repository (client-server) where modders (with partial access to the games sourcecode) can contribute updates (on machine-instruction level - not scripts) and let the developer create a monthly game-patch. The problem here is that you open yourself up to a can-of-worms security-wise. The game then becomes a commercial open-source project and I find it hard to imagine programmers wanting to contribute on that level. One additional problem is that your machine-level protection-scheme doesn't change, so a willful cracker could just repeat his crack. The upside has to be that getting updates are so valuable, that fiddling around with new cracks becomes so tedious that it's not worth it.

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

One aspect of squeeks idea seems to be that the player basically doesn't know which mods he receives (because of how they are interactively acquired), so that it is very hard for pirates to emulate this customization effect. So taking into account what NN pointed out about mods usually being data not patches, and the difficulty of a modular patching aproach, it would still seem such a setup could be dissuading to pirates, because they would basically have to setup a similar service.
That is assuming that a pirated version could NOT access the online service.

@NN thanks for the reply on my question, I'll rspond to that later, when I have more time.

 

[Naked Ninja]

One aspect of squeeks idea seems to be that the player basically doesn't know which mods he receives (because of how they are interactively acquired), so that it is very hard for pirates to emulate this customization effect.

The problem is that, while the player doesn't know what mods are received, the code has to. The server can't just log onto your machine and swap around files, it need to connect to a game patching update software, send down a list of files to modify etc. Which means all your pirate needs to do is crack the updater which in turn gives them full access to the list of changes being sent down from the server to the client.

It isn't tedious because it's easy to automate. You just subvert the update process. Once the machine code that is running the data files is compromised it's essentially an enemy agent. If it knows how the pieces fit together, the pirate knows, yes?

Even if you automated it so that the system takes you picks, creates a large merged file with all of them in it and sent that down, a pirate can just create automated scripts to download each option available and distribute them in a large pack. In fact, you could reverse engineer the process. Simply choose pick A, get the file. Choose pick B, get the file. Choose pick A+B, get the composite, see how it differs from A and B standalone. Do that for a couple and figure out the pack format. Once you know the format you can download all of them individually and write your own packer app for your pirate friends.

Believe me, pirates get off on that kind of thing, challenge gives them wood.

If they can crack protected media formats and DRM, they will get through this. The only way to really protect it is to keep your game logic on the server.

 

[Benedict]

You just subvert the update process.

Bah, there's a way round everything!

Can't the update process effectively be a form of regular online activation though?