Mass Effect - Copy Protection Details

[Dhruin]

With the PC version only a few weeks away, BioWare's Derek French has revealed the copy protection scheme for Mass Effect on the official forums (http://masseffect.bioware.com/forums/viewtopic.html?topic=628375&forum=125&sp=3), including the fact that a periodic internet connection is mandatory:
Mass Effect uses SecuROM and requires an online activation for the first time that you play it. Each copy of Mass Effect comes with a CD Key which is used for this activation and for registration here at the BioWare Community. Mass Effect does not require the DVD to be in the drive in order to play, it is only for installation.

After the first activation, SecuROM requires that it re-check with the server within ten days (in case the CD Key has become public/warez'd and gets banned). Just so that the 10 day thing doesn't become abrupt, SecuROM tries its first re-check with 5 days remaining in the 10 day window. If it can't contact the server before the 10 days are up, nothing bad happens and the game still runs. After 10 days a re-check is required before the game can run.
...and you can find further clarification in this post (http://masseffect.bioware.com/forums/viewtopic.html?topic=628375&forum=125&sp=44). Some players are going to welcome this and others aren't.
Thanks, Stanza!
More information. (http://www.rpgwatch.com/show/newsbit?newsbit=8894)

[woges]

Ah well, you can put me in the saved some money group for MEPC.

Really tired of these harsh copy protection routines for PC now.

[15th]

Well, although I can understand *their* need for this, it's just getting a little insane the number of hoops legit users have to jump through.

[Roi Danton]

Ok, some points.
First one: kudos for not needing the DVD to play the game.
Second: I rather have that copy protection than the Two Worlds one (yeah, it might be cool for someone who doesn't change much in their hardware system, but for passionate hardware freaks like myself it's just stupid and annoying).
Third: I really don't understand the need to reconnect. Something like steam should work fine.

At last, I have to say that I take an online copy protection (like steam) any day over some stupid fucked up CD/DVD copy protection. I look at you World in Conflict or The Witcher. Both those games require me to shut down my process explorer because both of them use the same f***ed up protection (it's SecuRom, if I'm not mistaken and I do hope that this problem has been taken care of in the mean time).

[zakhal]

Mass Effect does not require the DVD to be in the drive in order to play, it is only for installation.

I like! Hate swapping those dvds just because som other persons like to pirate the game.
After the first activation, SecuROM requires that it re-check with the server within ten days (in case the CD Key has become public/warez'd and gets banned). Just so that the 10 day thing doesn't become abrupt, SecuROM tries its first re-check with 5 days remaining in the 10 day window. If it can't contact the server before the 10 days are up, nothing bad happens and the game still runs. After 10 days a re-check is required before the game can run.

I do hope it works but didnt assasins creed have somthing like this allready? It tries to connect to som ubi server all the time during the game. It didnt work at all though, the game was pirated almost immediatly after release.

These checks wont last forever though naturally. Sooner or later they will release a patch that removes it (once most of the sales have been done).

[Stanza]

There's also questions going around about revocation, to which Bioware has not responded. This is raising FUD by online tongue-waggers about whether you regain one of the 3 licenses when uninstalling -- a separate revocation tool may be required, as with Bioshock.

[doctor_kaz]

As usual, the pirates will probably find a way to completely disable this in a few days and the legitimate users will get all of the inconvenience.

[Keeng]

Yeah, pirates will bypass the protection in no time, while those who bought the game will have to suffer the inconviniencies of the protection. Why do they even bother?

[mogwins]

Some players are going to welcome this and others aren't.
Thanks, Stanza!


I don't think any players are really going to welcome it? Some will understand why they've done it, maybe, but as others have said already, anyone who wants to pirate this game will do so regardless (it'll be hacked in days if not hours), and it's only the legitimate owners of the game that have to live with the inconvenience of its "copy protection" scheme.

[zakhal]

As long as it gets rid of dvd swapping I do welcome it.

[screeg]

Well, although I can understand *their* need for this, it's just getting a little insane the number of hoops legit users have to jump through.
Maybe you could fill me in on their need. Is it the need to delay pirates from distributing their game for the first 6 hours after its release, while inconveniencing everyone who pays for the game? Forever?

I haven't had an internet connection at home for over a week now, and I'm so sick of talking to AT&T I'm thinking of just canceling it. That said, kudos to Bioware for restricting your game to players with a home internet connection! I'm sure all your fans in Eastern Europe and Russia will be thrilled as well.

One more thing: If I actually had any desire to play this game, I would basically be forced into supporting piracy myself, to the extent I would need a hack to use their product. Luckily, I've given up on AAA titles altogether. Long live Armageddon Empires!

[mogwins]

As long as it gets rid of dvd swapping I do welcome it.

Yeah, that's a pain. I feel no guilt about downloading a NoCD patch for such games. I legitimately paid for the game, I'm not giving the CD/DVD to anyone else. I don't have a problem with it.

In the same way I could imagine people who've legitimately purchased a game to use illegitimate solutions to e.g., not having a home internet connection. It's ridiculous that software companies force users into these solutions, but there you go.

Again, this "copy-protection" does not protect the game from being copied - it simply annoys people who've legitimately paid for the game!

[Prime Junta]

What "hoops?"

I'm cool with this. I'd much rather have on-line CP than drive-based CP -- that just breaks with operating system updates, mucks up the hardware, *and* requires the annoyance of swapping DVD's.

And yeah, I'd love it if they came up with a business model that didn't need copy protection, yadda yadda yadda, but as long as they don't, and as long as piracy is as rampant as it is, it's something I can live with -- *if* it doesn't inconvenience me, open security holes in my computer, or compromise my privacy. This appears to be less inconvenient than most schemes and doesn't appear to have any of the real problems either.

And no, I cannot believe that there are a significant number of potential Mass Effect players who can't open up an Internet connection once a week after installing the game, even if they're on dialup. You need moderately serious hardware to play it in the first place, which means you can afford it. I could've done it from Kyiv in 1999, and I don't believe for a moment you can't do it from Moscow in 2008.

[Holly Avenger]

There's also questions going around about revocation, to which Bioware has not responded. This is raising FUD by online tongue-waggers about whether you regain one of the 3 licenses when uninstalling -- a separate revocation tool may be required, as with Bioshock.

And just like Bioshock, I won't be purchasing Mass Effect for this very reason.

Sucks that (potential) legitimate customers get shafted, isn't it? But I simply will not buy something that limits how/where I install and play the game like this.

Now this online system as an alternative to playing with the DVD in the drive I would have no issues with whatsoever - that way everyone wins.

[zakhal]

They should divide each game into a server and client and put small critical parts of the game into the serverside code. It would work like mmog and be completely uncrackable (unless somone manages to steal it).

After a year or two they could release a patch that adds the server code into the client so that you dont need internet connection anymore.

The only limitation is that they cant put just any part into the server side code. It should be somthing that does not lag the game no matter how poor the connection and ping is. And it should also be somthing that cant be easily reconstructed (dont remember what the right word was).

Oh, I have had a connection to the bbs/net on every pc I owned since the early 90s or somthing. My first modem was 2400bds.

[Squeek]

If I'm understanding it right, your legitimately purchased copy could stop working if your CD key, somehow, became public knowledge. It would be forever banned.

Once I hired a kid to work for me who turned out to be quite an adept and active hacker. After about a week, I noticed that my Windows installation disk was missing, and I asked him about it. He said he had "borrowed" it.

I got the CD back but always wondered if he'd uploaded a copy of it somewhere and how many "pirates" were running my copy of Windows on their machines. If Microsoft were using this kind of copy protection then, I probably would have been forced to go out and purchase another copy.

[r3dshift]

All this hazy justification of strict copy protection measures by saying they're a means to fight piracy is utter bollocks. If people like a game, it'll sell regardless of protection. C.f. Oblivion, which had no protection at all and still sold shitloads (no arguements on whether it's a good game or not, please). Not to mention the fact that the protection will be pawned eventually -- usually sooner than later.

In general, game developers should focus on bringing out quality titles that actually deliver some value instead of wasting time/money/resources on useless copy protection and also alienating their fan and customer base along the way. It was just recently that Crytek also moaned about how piracy was killing their sales of Crysis. I say if they had put some depth and variety into the gameplay instead of essentially releasing a tech demo that only a select few can run at high-fidelity visuals, they might have made more bucks.

I have said this before, now I'm repeating it: BioWare have become a bunch of bitches.

[Prime Junta]

If I'm understanding it right, your legitimately purchased copy could stop working if your CD key, somehow, became public knowledge. It would be forever banned.

Once I hired a kid to work for me who turned out to be quite an adept and active hacker. After about a week, I noticed that my Windows installation disk was missing, and I asked him about it. He said he had "borrowed" it.

I got the CD back but always wondered if he'd uploaded a copy of it somewhere and how many "pirates" were running my copy of Windows on their machines. If Microsoft were using this kind of copy protection then, I probably would have been forced to go out and purchase another copy.

There's no identifying information on your Windows install disk, so unless he "borrowed" your product key as well, there's no problem. And, FWIW, Microsoft are using this type of copy protection -- if your product key leaks, it'll get blacklisted, which means your "WGA" (Windows Genuine Advantage) feature will emasculate your OS the next time it installs a critical update.

[curiously undead]

the only reason oblivion sold shitloads without copy protection is
A) no f'ing demo
B)consoles

[r3dshift]

the only reason oblivion sold shitloads without copy protection is
A) no f'ing demo
B)consoles


Ain't it the very same thing with Mass Effect, then? Conclusion: BW are morons indeed.

[rooroosta]

All this extreme copy protection stuff certainly puts me off buying the games...

[Squeek]

It would be in BioWare's best interest to have as many people playing and enjoying their game as possible, including pirates. So instead of putting a limit on it as a deterent, they should put additional value on owning the game.

This kind of copy-protection scheme would achieve that if it offered more to legitimate players than just enabling them to use the product they purchased. If Mass Effect included availability to downloadable content that factored into the game (instead of merely adding on), that would be a lot easier to take (and would make the game more fun and intriguing).

That way pirated versions would be good while legitimate versions would be even better.

[drum]

Thank goodness I've already played it on xbox.

By the way, I think 10 days should be enough to finish the game for the majority of players, pure storyline is hardly more than 15 hours, and there might be up to 10 hours of sidequests - but they are so repetitive that only xbox achievements freaks can do them all. So playing a couple of hours each evening you'll beat it in a week or so and won't need to reactivate unless you start 2nd walkthrough immediately.

[drum]

This kind of copy-protection scheme would achieve that if it offered more to legitimate players than just enabling them to use the product they purchased. If Mass Effect included downloadable content that factored into -- instead of layering on top of -- the game, it would be a lot easier to take (and would make the game more fun and intriguing).


I think they are giving "Bring down the sky" mini-addon for free to the registered users. I don't know if it's any good though because xbox live is not oficially working in Russia and I didn't bother looking for a workaround. But I think it's just what you're talking about, right?

[Squeek]

But I think it's just what you're talking about, right?Not if it's just an add-on that would fit every game, because then it can be pirated too. If it's something made in a variety of iterations that are designed to fit into a game and improve it as it's being played, then yeah.

Unlike most other applications RPGs could be designed to accommodate modularity. That could provide variety, which would improve the game. If those "modules" only worked for legitimate users, that would work to circumvent piracy instead of trying to block it.

RPGs already keep track of player-made decisions, and developers already make additional content. If developers were smarter about it, they could combine those ideas and motivate more customers to buy their games.

[zakhal]

Thank goodness I've already played it on xbox.

By the way, I think 10 days should be enough to finish the game for the majority of players, pure storyline is hardly more than 15 hours, and there might be up to 10 hours of sidequests - but they are so repetitive that only xbox achievements freaks can do them all. So playing a couple of hours each evening you'll beat it in a week or so and won't need to reactivate unless you start 2nd walkthrough immediately.

Combat should be better&more enjoyable in pc and graphics and ui too. Plus it has the miniaddon also that xbox players had to buy as downloaded content. Also the game got multiple perfect 100% reviews for xbox (it was THE reason to buy the console) so pc one must be atleast 110%!!½

25-30 hours is enough for me. Also the game costs only 66% of what the xbox version cost during release so its kinda cheap too. So no I cant see any reason why I should not enjoy the pc version of this masterpiece. ;)

The next "messiah" game from these developers is for pc only (atleast for starters) btw iirc.

[skrap]

I think I just decided to not get the game at all.

[aries100]

Yes, the game might only take 25-30 hours for some, but for other gamers, it would probably take like 50-60 hours. And yet other gamers might simply not have the time to play 2-3 hours a day (or more). I know I certainly don't have the time for this anymore, except maybe in weekends.

As I said on the Bioware forums for Mass Effect PC, I think Bioware and EA still thinks that PC gamers are either kids or at least 18-25 year old male college students that have all the time in the world to sit around playing videogames. Not so - not anymore.

I bought Jade EmpireSE (for PC) in february 2007. And I have only played a small part of it. If this system had been place at that time, my firing up Jade Empire now would probably have led me to 1) a need to re-activate the game or 2) at least a need to re-authenticate the game.

Bioware/EA is probably trying to get people away from using nocd cracks for their games (not that I support these) by using this copy protection system. Many people seem to like to be able to play without the dvd in the disk drive; not me, though.

I'm just worried that we will have the a repeating of Bioshock's incident from August/September 2008...when the 2K forums were swarmed with people that couldn't get their games to activate because the servers were down - due to the many people truing to activate all at once...

[leth]

Yes, the game might only take 25-30 hours for some, but for other gamers, it would probably take like 50-60 hours. And yet other gamers might simply not have the time to play 2-3 hours a day (or more). I know I certainly don't have the time for this anymore, except maybe in weekends.

As I said on the Bioware forums for Mass Effect PC, I think Bioware and EA still thinks that PC gamers are either kids or at least 18-25 year old male college students that have all the time in the world to sit around playing videogames. Not so - not anymore.

I bought Jade EmpireSE (for PC) in february 2007. And I have only played a small part of it. If this system had been place at that time, my firing up Jade Empire now would probably have led me to 1) a need to re-activate the game or 2) at least a need to re-authenticate the game.

Bioware/EA is probably trying to get people away from using nocd cracks for their games (not that I support these) by using this copy protection system. Many people seem to like to be able to play without the dvd in the disk drive; not me, though.

I'm just worried that we will have the a repeating of Bioshock's incident from August/September 2008...when the 2K forums were swarmed with people that couldn't get their games to activate because the servers were down - due to the many people truing to activate all at once...

Agree completely... I know plenty of people at work that plays game but goes on trips very often, and then there are those with family and to becareful with their vacation plans.
But now, if they want to play ME on PC they have to work their schedules around the game activation windows! Awesome!

I hate to say this, but looks like I am going to miss out on this game too :(

[Surlent]

During last late summer I went through a damn ordeal, the ones only seen in hell, just to get a legimate copy of Bioshock running. SecuRom had tried some nice fancy online checking system with BioShock and for some people it wouldn't work for the life of them. In the end, I had to contact their support just so they could enable my CD key. And I don't even want to start ranting now after all these months what means I tried before contacting their support.

After going through a mess like that, I don't anymore want to bother with these crazy new ideas computer game and copy protection software developers have in their minds. Not that I have ever been a fan of Bioware in the first place, but I just wanted to speak my piece about these so called exciting new ideas for copy protection.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Why are they using no low-end stuff like codwheels anymore ???

Do they fear that they are just too easy to copy ?

No, if a game needs an internet connection in order to be played, then I won't buy it. The console buyers don't have it as well !

[Majnun]

I read this thread and all I hear is Abe Simpson saying "I'm old and change frightens me!".

For once I think other people are over-reacting (instead of it being me).

I have zero problem with this. I mean really, what's the big deal here as long as they're telling you up front it needs to do this?

It checks when you first run it (just like Bioshock and pretty much ALL Valve games). Then it has to check ONE more friggin time before 10 days is up to verify.

Oh, and the big problems people had getting Bioshock to work were because the server it needed to connect to was overloaded and kept going down the first few days (they underestimated how many people would be nailing that server at the same time). Now, if there is any problem with it, you just reboot and try again and it works fine (did for me anyway).

How is that such a major deal?

You're all being paranoid, overreacting, hammerheads.

[mogwins]

I read this thread and all I hear is Abe Simpson saying "I'm old and change frightens me!".

For once I think other people are over-reacting (instead of it being me).

I have zero problem with this. I mean really, what's the big deal here as long as they're telling you up front it needs to do this?

It checks when you first run it (just like Bioshock and pretty much ALL Valve games). Then it has to check ONE more friggin time before 10 days is up to verify.

Oh, and the big problems people had getting Bioshock to work were because the server it needed to connect to was overloaded and kept going down the first few days (they underestimated how many people would be nailing that server at the same time). Now, if there is any problem with it, you just reboot and try again and it works fine (did for me anyway).

How is that such a major deal?

You're all being paranoid, overreacting, hammerheads.

There's also the limit on the number of times you can install this. I don't know about you, but I've got games that I've installed/uninstalled a great number of times on a great number of machines down the years (Fallout, Torment and Wizardry 8 spring to mind), which wouldn't be allowed under this new protection scheme. Screw that. I bought the game, I should be allowed to install/uninstall it as I see fit.

[mulsum]

First of all please excuse any typos in my post...my active english is a bit rusty.

I used to check out this forum since it started, never registered. I thought to post as a guest but reconsidered. Don't know why. Maybe because I'm so
furious over the way the companies and even Bioware start treating their customers as potential criminals.

On topic:
I will not support this kind of customer-treatment by EA/Bioware in any way.

Makes me feel rather sad...I played every Bioware-RPG since Baldurs Gate and was looking forward to play this one, too.
Guess I have to wait till they put out this 'remove-the-verificaction-patch' they promised for the time the game will not be supported any more.
If it will take some years, so be it.

What really worries me is that they do the same thing to Dragonage and I have to skip this one, too.
Please,, nooo!

[Alrik Fassbauer]

It checks when you first run it (just like Bioshock and pretty much ALL Valve games). Then it has to check ONE more friggin time before 10 days is up to verify

Which I won't buy *because of that*.

(Apart from the fact that the themes of these games don't interest me at all.)

[And by the way, the Hammerhead was to me the most interesting character in the whole Star Wars movie ! :p ]

[Jaesun]

This is EA's decision, not Bioware (SPORE will have this copy protection, as well as all other future EA titles I *assume* from now on).

Even the Digital Download has this copy protection. Bleh. I do not pirate games, but I am just not too happy about this. My only concern is that say 10 - 15 years from now, and say I want to play this game, and say EA is no longer in existence... well guess what. You can no longer play it. EVER.

Mr. French did say that if something like this happened they would release a patch that removes the copy protection. So if EA goes away and or bankrupt, the first thing Bioware are going to do is rush out the patch to remove this copy protection? I really don't think so.

[Hedek]

I just don't understand how all these gaming companies can have genius minds to program all those oh so technically challenging and complicated engines all the while being so ignorant of how piracy works.
Within a week after release AT MOST, there will be a "fixed exe" available for download on most P2P platforms or directly on famous piracy websites (g...copy...) that will remove the secuROM lines of code altogether from masseffect.exe and it'll be downloaded by pirates and legitimate buyers alike who can't stand the hassle of anti-piracy checks.
All this is doing is giving more cash to incompetent companies like secuROM and annoying legitimate costumers.
The only way to stop single-player PC games piracy is doing like MMOs: storing characters and "saves" and other vital data server-side, requiring to connect to the server everytime you launch the game, and analysing/checking the client-side files to make sure they're indentical to the server-side ones.
Any time all the vital information is on the client computer, it's over, there WILL be piracy no matter what security system is used: "fixed exe" will be coded to "clean" the exe from their security crap.
In order to become secure, the game has to be programmed from as early as pre-production as a game that will require server interaction, some lines of code that you "add" once your game is finished will never become "piracy-proof". There will always be a smarter cracker than the fools from secuROM.

But who's the real fool there, secuROM or the fools they fooled into buying their products?
For years devs have been paying those incompetent security companies and for years it didn't work. For years MMOs have been in existence now and they have not been pirated. All those years and SP games developers still didn't learn the lesson? Why they still pay those security companies is beyond me.

[mulsum]

I just read a post over at bioware's by Derek French that all their upcoming EA PC titles will have this kind of copy-protection.
So, there goes Dragonage as well.
And oh, by the way...
If I understand it right, it's not just one check at the start of the game and one after 10 days but a constant re-check every 10 days as long as you own this game.

[kalniel]

It's more than fine with me - I'm happy to support a game that has a copy protection system designed around consumers concerns. The vast majority of complaints I personally hear about copy protection are to do with problems playing the disk or people not wanting to use the disk in the first place. Nearly all the complainants have asked for steam or another online based authentication system instead, and in MEPC it looks like they've been listened to. Kudos BW.

[mogwins]

It's more than fine with me - I'm happy to support a game that has a copy protection system designed around consumers concerns. The vast majority of complaints I personally hear about copy protection are to do with problems playing the disk or people not wanting to use the disk in the first place. Nearly all the complainants have asked for steam or another online based authentication system instead, and in MEPC it looks like they've been listened to. Kudos BW.

That's because the public is, by-and-large, ignorant, and hasn't thought through the implications of this. Yes, swapping discs when you want to play a game is a minor irritation. But imagine the publisher goes bust (or, less drastically, 10 years from now, no longer supports the game): They're not going to take away my disc, so I can still play the game. If, however, the software has to "call home" before it will run, I can no longer play it. To me, that possibility (which, granted, is greater for smaller companies than giants like EA) is simply not acceptable.

Either way this is ignoring the bigger issue: Neither method is going to stop piracy, so why bother at all, when the only people you're actually penalising are the legitimate owners of the game? The music industry is just starting to realise that DRM, and attempting to dictate when and where a user can use a product they've paid for, does not increase their sales (c.f. Amazon selling unprotected mp3s, which is forcing evil Apple to follow suit). Hopefully the software industry will finally come to its senses too.

[Turjan]

Although I'm not happy with this kind of copy protection, I don't understand some of the arguments here.

1. In all cases I know so far, the copy protection of games has been removed by a patch within a year or two. The limit on the number of installs only considers the initial launch time of the game. Later on, the company is not really interested anymore, because sales have gone to numbers where pirating doesn't matter.

2. Copy protection is not really meant to prevent software pirates and habitual game downloaders from doing such things. I'm not sure why most people think that those company guys are stupid. They know this. What they want to prevent is that the school kid gives his own DVD and installation key to all his school friends when the game comes out. If it is very convenient to do so, even people who are not computer savvy will do this. It's these "pirates by chance" that copy protection targets.

[Squeek]

Yeah, a kid can distribute a game to dozens of his friends at school, some of which might have otherwise purchased it. But a guy who uploads a game someplace where it can be accessed via the Internet is giving everyone online the opportunity to help themselves to it.

[Guhndahb]

I find it interesting that Derek French has been pretty good about answering questions about the copy protection, even answering repeated questions with patience, but has completely ignored any requests about the ability to deactivate to free up an activation "slot", including mine in the Securom FAQ sticky.

I'm hoping that that is because he doesn't know and intends to find out, but I'd prefer him to actually say that rather than evade. While I'm not happy at all about the scheme, I'm willing to tolerate it if deactivation is possible. But everyone has to have their own line in the sand, and the ability to deactivate is where I draw mine.

And it's not at all just about Mass Effect. For PC gamers, like it or not, EA is going to be a potent publishing force for the foreseeable future. So I can only hope that they can be guided away from such draconian measures.

[Turjan]

Yeah, a kid can distribute a game to dozens of his friends at school, some of which might have otherwise purchased it. But a guy who uploads a game someplace where it can be accessed via the Internet is giving everyone online the opportunity to help themselves to it.
While this is correct, not everyone downloads current software from illegal sources. Of course, if you reduce my example to literally "one kid", it sounds ridiculous. But nearly everyone who buys a game has friends, siblings, parents, colleagues, who he might want to share his game with. Most of these people don't have high technical skills or habitually download pirated software. But if you get a CD from a friend, why say no?

Software companies don't like to talk about this point. They rather point at the evil warez sites. But in reality, for the company, it's much easier to target the average customer, and it's much more successful for them.

[Dhruin]

There's also the limit on the number of times you can install this. I don't know about you, but I've got games that I've installed/uninstalled a great number of times on a great number of machines down the years (Fallout, Torment and Wizardry 8 spring to mind), which wouldn't be allowed under this new protection scheme. Screw that. I bought the game, I should be allowed to install/uninstall it as I see fit.

I find it interesting that Derek French has been pretty good about answering questions about the copy protection, even answering repeated questions with patience, but has completely ignored any requests about the ability to deactivate to free up an activation "slot", including mine in the Securom FAQ sticky.

Mogwins, there is no limit on the number of installs on the same hardware. Guhndahb, Derek French has answered this:

There is the misconception that this is based on installation and it is not. You can install and uninstall as many times as you like. It all comes down to when you run the MassEffect.exe program. In the quoted example above, reinstalling on the same computer will not reduce the activation count. Its not based on installation. [...]

It doesn't, as we wrote the installer and I have installed and uninstalled MEPC about 5 times a day during normal builds and installer testing for the past 3 months. I have never done anything more than the initial activation and the game has always played for me.

I have also Shift+Delete'd my "C:\games\Mass Effect\" directory a few times.

And I changed my video card out, once.

http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/showthread.php?t=44278&page=2

You guys can bypass it; I'm going to enjoy not worrying about the DVD, which I'm comfortable trading for an online check every 10 days. I'm a slow player, but even it takes me a couple of months, that's only half a dozen checks - I can live with that.

[mogwins]

Mogwins, there is no limit on the number of installs on the same hardware. Guhndahb, Derek French has answered this:


Well, that's good! I still don't like the idea of having to call home though. In ten years time, will the servers still be there? I doubt it. Will the developers have the, time/money to release a patch to negate the "call home" protection? In the case of EA/Bioware - probably, but my concern is that this becomes industry standard, and I wouldn't be so optimistic of smaller companies who can go under very quickly, with very little warning. What option then? Find an illegal solution? Kind of defeats the point of copy protection!

I still maintain that corporations trying to dictate when/where you can use a product you've paid for is intrinsically wrong and something that shouldn't be encouraged. I'm very glad to see Amazon breaking Apple's DRM stranglehold in the digital music market. Just imagine Apple went under tomorrow (almost inconceivable, I know, but humour me) as soon as your current Ipod finally dies (not that long a period as Apple doesn't allow non-apple servicing even for trivial tasks like battery replacement), your precious itunes collection can't be used on portable music players (unless you reply on hacking of the DRM, which again defeats teh entire purpose). I'd rather the software industry didn't get into this state in the first place.

[Gorath]

Mogwins, there is no limit on the number of installs on the same hardware. Guhndahb, Derek French has answered this:
Then Derek is avoiding the real question. What about the people who are replacing hardware frequently? A graphics card here, CPU & mainboard there ... how often can they install?

You guys can bypass it; I'm going to enjoy not worrying about the DVD, which I'm comfortable trading for an online check every 10 days. I'm a slow player, but even it takes me a couple of months, that's only half a dozen checks - I can live with that.
I´m still undecided about this. I´m not against online activation, but one check every 10 days is too much for my taste.

[Saerden]

1. Torrent-class piracy cannot be stopped (outside of collectivist facist state or at least total ban on personal computers). If protection technology becomes too much for idealistic release groups, forces with financial interest step in (people have to sell burners, blankets etc ...)

2. "Piracy" (below counter, "asia") cannot be stopped at all. Organised crime has been dealing with things that are actually harmful, disgusting and not accepted by the general population for millenia (human trafficking etc). "Bans", "Crackdowns", "Wars on [SIN]" drive up profits (fundamental principle of supply / demand) and either deliver the killing blow (governments ... success ... heh) or make them stronger.


So is copy protection about piracy? Not at all, at least not about piracy as we understand it. Its about "casuals" and controll. Not sure wether there is a big conspiracy behind it, but its certainly not rational from a longterm business POV.

Take a look here how evil library pirates have been destroying the printing business since 1455:

http://www.baen.com/library/



Next rant: freeloading ad-blocker piracy punks are ruining the internet.

[mogwins]

Mogwins, there is no limit on the number of installs on the same hardware.

Ah, I hadn't noticed that. That makes a big difference, because I've installed Fallout/Torment on probably a dozen different hardware set-ups over the years (I like to tinker with hardware). I presume I couldn't do that with this form of copy protection - that's an infringement of my rights as a consumer - and a deal-breaker for me buying the game (not that I suspect I'd *want* to play it to the same extent as Fallout/Torment, but that's another story).

[Dhruin]

I´m still undecided about this. I´m not against online activation, but one check every 10 days is too much for my taste.

Would I prefer absolutely no CP at all, like, say TotalGaming? Sure. But this won't make any practical difference to me, so I'm not going to avoid a game I was looking for to over it.

[Guhndahb]

Guhndahb, Derek French has answered this:I read all of his posts, including that one, but, at least by my interpretation, it does not have any bearing on my concerns. With activation schemes I insist on the ability to deactivate to free up an activation. There's no good reason for that to be unavailable. I tolerate it with MS with disgust because I have no choice, but refuse to tolerate it with anyone else.

I'm a tinkerer, and I tinker quite a bit on my gaming system. I do not want to worry about hardware (or even software) changes like I already have to with MS products. He tries to trivialize that issue by saying that his changes haven't caused a need for reactivation. But I find that unacceptable. Windows activation has required reactivation for me a number of times when I didn't even make true hardware changes. Do they use a different hardware ID system? Yes, of course. It could be better, it course be worse, but it matters a great deal less if I can just deactivate before making any significant changes to my system.

[guenthar]

Not one protection scheme will stop piracy even if you put vital data on a server and make you access the internet to access it. Not even making it like an mmo but single player will work. The first idea will fail since the data needs to go to your computer to use it so can be captured from the internet and then the game would be cracked to check for the data on the local computer. With making it mmo like you do the same thing and make the game look on your computer instead of over the internet.

The only way to lower piracy is to make the games like mmo's and have a monthly fee so that they can hire people to generate content. You would have new content constantly on a timed basis and have special events every so often. This would make it simular to an mmo but in a single player type game.

[Acleacius]

Great another stupid publisher trick forcing us to get NoCd cracks, due to poorly designed and unnecessary copy protections. Just like any propaganda coming from anyone whom makes a profit off this or the fact that anyone would *ucking trust ea not put spyware in our PCs or not to take our personal data, is quite frankly astonishing.

Even if ME is expected to sell 1 million copies and it sells 2 million ea will still claim piracy is killing their sales. You know, cause ea is SO trust worthy and cares about games and the PC, they are just doing this for our and the industry's own good.

[15th]

Maybe you could fill me in on their need. Is it the need to delay pirates from distributing their game for the first 6 hours after its release, while inconveniencing everyone who pays for the game? Forever?

I was aiming for a little bit of emphasis with those Asterisk, but your comment is on the right track.

What "hoops?"

Not my best analogy (or is that Idiom?). The install limit will hit those that change machines or hardware around (though the same machine appears to be fine).
I'm also soon to be in a situation where I'll have minimal dial-up to access the net, if anything other than what I get at work.

There is that little extra effort here, and potential to have your key revoked or things go wrong that just makes this scenario undesirable.

I'm quite fine with account authorisation solutions like steam though. Much more liberal on what they allow, and (unless it crashes and kills the clientregistry.blog file) okay to go in offline more.

But who knows? They might get it right this time. Either way, they need to do a lot to convince me of my $ to put up with it.

[zakhal]

Not one protection scheme will stop piracy even if you put vital data on a server and make you access the internet to access it. Not even making it like an mmo but single player will work. The first idea will fail since the data needs to go to your computer to use it so can be captured from the internet and then the game would be cracked to check for the data on the local computer.

The only way to lower piracy is to make the games like mmo's and have a monthly fee so that they can hire people to generate content.


Guild wars sold 5 million and the game does not have any monthly fees or any noticeable amount of new content every month. Its also very much playable as a single player game and many play it like that too. Also som of its sp content is so good it actually raises above average sp crpg.

Another future protection is naturally hardware one like in the current generation of consoles. Its just a matter of time until the gaming alliance of hardware/software manufactures puts hardware level copyprotection into pc too. In the newest consoles it has worked really well.

I believe firmly that in future pirating of pc games will diminish with these new protections and we will see a new golden era of pc gaming when all that money becomes available to developers.

[Holly Avenger]

I suspect a big part of the reason to adopt this new system is not so much to combat piracy, but to combat resale of the software - with limited installs and a unique CD-key that is tied to your own personal account, it will be hard to sell on this software. And that means more sales of originals while screwing the right of resale that you should have with something you own.

It's all about the money. EA's influence on Bioware is already starting to shine through it seems.

I've become increasingly disillusioned with gaming over the last few years... the quality of games (at least the type of quality that matters to me - I'm not talking pretty graphics here) has gone right downhill. I play less and less as it is. With the few games I had any real interest in deciding to slap on draconian drm on top... I may just give up altogether.

[Hedek]

Another future protection is naturally hardware one like in the current generation of consoles. Its just a matter of time until the gaming alliance of hardware/software manufactures puts hardware level copyprotection into pc too. In the newest consoles it has worked really well.

I believe firmly that in future pirating of pc games will diminish with these new protections and we will see a new golden era of pc gaming when all that money becomes available to developers.

I don't believe hardware protection would happen either, that would mean killing the consoles market. The only reason Nintendo Microsoft and Sony build and sell consoles is because they know they'll be holding software makers by the throat and punction of huge a share of the software revenues in exchange of the "DRM method" (aka "consoles") they're providing. Consoles are just that, a hardware DRM, the controlers, the CPU, the graphic cards, the DVD player are just secondary perks to convince costumers to buy those DRMs.
And the only reason developers make console games and accept to give 30% of their profits to console manufacturers is because they're piracy free.
Why would Sony Microsoft and everyone else ever agree for a hardware DRM protection to install in every computer when that'll totally kill their console sales?
PC manufacturers don't need that to sell their computers anyway. Really that would only benefit software developers, so don't expect hardware companies to do something for them.

What will happen, or at least what should happen, is single player games becoming more like Guild Wars : all the vital information (saves, characters, advancement) is stored server-side and requires a unique account and password.

Any other software DRM added to the game.exe will be cleaned and removed by smarter crackers than the idiots from secuROM and those "fixed exe" will be available anywhere.

[guenthar]

I did a quick search and can't find any cracks/third party clients for Guild Wars so currently it looks like there is no way to pirate Guild Wars. Other mmo's do have third party clients and can be pirated. Just remember that not everything gets pirated since it requires people willing to do it.

I would try Guild Wars but I am not intrerested in games in an isometric view. I think the main reasons why Guild Wars became so popular is for one that it is an mmo that people can play without monthly fees; two that it was really hyped; and three that (I guess) it is a really good game.

EDIT
I forgot one other reason why Guild Wars was so popular and that is (like other mmos) that it has low system requirements.

[Stanza]

I'm a tinkerer, and I tinker quite a bit on my gaming system. ... But I find that unacceptable. Windows activation has required reactivation for me a number of times when I didn't even make true hardware changes.

We may learn the answer to this when some of the press previews come on line. Some of those sites swap out hardware and try different machines, and if they start getting locked out, it may make for some extra pre-release drama. I believe Bioshock was a bit bruised and bloodied from that before its street date.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

But imagine the publisher goes bust (or, less drastically, 10 years from now, no longer supports the game): They're not going to take away my disc, so I can still play the game.

In principle this is right, but if your disk becomes too scratchy, then you won't get any replacement disk from them (like I already wrote in my "A Thought" topic).


One of the far beter copy protections is that of the game called Zanzarah which you most likely might not know:

If the disk isn't in its drive, then the own fairy (you let battle with other fairies) becomes far too weak ... Meanwhile the opponent's fairies become too strong ...

[doctor_kaz]

I guess in the big scheme of things this plan isn't too bad. I'm not a big fan of the on-line checks, but if they happen only once per 10 days, that's not horrible. That's better than the NWN modules that required 100% connection at all times.

[mute]

Having played many games with online activation - Race, rFactor, FSX, Bioshock. I have often wondered why don't they use online activation. I love Steam taking care of my Race07, and have had no problems with Bioshock, or the reinstallation of FSX.

This is the way to go in the copy protection business...(Altough i prefer not having it at all, but if i must this is preferred).

[Saerden]

1. Kind of ironic that all those DRM actually hurt the piracy haters the most:
They target exactly those unalienable rights that noone (except company fanbois) would ever deem immoral:
Resale and lending games to your friends, family etc.

It worked for books, it worked for cars, it worked for software. Yet there are doomsayers all over the place. Maybe in the distant future, reselling your car will be illegal as well? Think its unlikely? There is already a collectivist ideology that wants to get rid of economic freedoms - climate alarmism.

Torrents dont care wether Jane casual can give a copy of Sims 4 to her daughter or not. So why target the law-abiding when the big mean world doesnt care?

I think the strategy is re-education. Drill people that they dont own anything despite paying money, so that longterm any form sharing (libraries, borrowing from friends) gets associated with theft, immorality etc. Lots of similar propaganda of that sort on MMO forums already, with plenty of fanbois defending it ("Goldselling" is illegal, immoral yada yada (if you are a normal guy looking to cash out to fund college) yet those games are full of (and sometimes dominated by - professionals can run the elite guilds just as well or even better) goldfarmers.)


2. Hardware copy protection
Piracy not only exists on consoles - some say that certain consoles are basically driven by piracy (PS2)

Piracy is rationally beneficient for everyone except software developers (though some so-called OpenSource fanatics dont seem to mind that they are robbed and plundered on a daily basis, just look at ubuntu torrents).

Hardware copy protection would:
-Increase benefits to develop software on said hardware (though it is debatable and not yet researched wether there are more efficient ways to reward software production besides "pay per licence"), thus potentially increasing aviability of software aviability in the longterm.

-Hugely increase costs to operate said hardware (mitigated a lot if hardware is capable of running "free" software without problems.), thus reducing demand (before even looking at competition)
-Generate minor backlash from "freedom fanatics".
-be very uncompetitive due to higher R&D costs and potential performance deficits

Hardware manufacturers (and anyone else besides SOME Software developers) has no inherent interest in preventing piracy ... time will tell wether a small minority will be able to force society to swim up a waterfall or wether society will find business models that guarantee a optimal balance of compensation for developers vs aviability of the product.

[PatrickWeekes]

If you've pirated a game or loaned a friend your disks while still playing the game yourself, you can look in the mirror for reasons why video-game designers are increasingly designing their games for consoles. On one forum (not this one), the first thing somebody said about Bioshock was that they'd get a free copy online, but that they didn't think it was worth paying money for. Way to help, guys.

[Elwro]

I'm fine with phoning home if it means my DVD stays in the box with no risk of scratching. But I want to be able to install the game on as many computers as I'd like, and also to have full freedom of exchanging my PC components with no risk of the game ceasing to want to run. So I'll pass, then. Games are expensive and I won't be taking any such risks.

[Squeek]

If you've pirated a game or loaned a friend your disks while still playing the game yourself, you can look in the mirror for reasons why video-game designers are increasingly designing their games for consoles. On one forum (not this one), the first thing somebody said about Bioshock was that they'd get a free copy online, but that they didn't think it was worth paying money for. Way to help, guys.So game makers aren't responsible for the copy protection they put into their games; game buyers are responsible? That's what you're saying, right?

That seems awfully convenient to me. While I don't blame game makers for wanting to protect their profits, I think it's a little weak to take pot shots at customers who don't like the sound of being inconvenienced.

Why hasn't the software industry come up with an effective solution to this problem that won't inconvenience loyal customers? Why does it produce so many products that customers feel weren't worth the money they paid for them? And why is it so hard for customers to trust anything the software industry says?

Maybe while we're busy looking in our mirrors, you could take a look in one of your own, Patrick, and ask yourself those kinds of questions.

[zakhal]

If you've pirated a game or loaned a friend your disks while still playing the game yourself, you can look in the mirror for reasons why video-game designers are increasingly designing their games for consoles. On one forum (not this one), the first thing somebody said about Bioshock was that they'd get a free copy online, but that they didn't think it was worth paying money for. Way to help, guys.

Everyone I know irl and plays games owns only 2-3 games at best. They read warezsite news to d/l the newest games for free as soon as they arrive with programs like torrent and dc++. There are "elite" warez insider clubs too where you can d/l them even sooner.

This goes for all games from bioshock to assassins creed. One even owns first xbox and has like 100 pirated games on it. He bought it for 1 euro and has never spent a dime more except for the modchip and harddrive.

I know only one person who doesnt do this and he owns a ps3 (onlyone at that). Apparently its too hard to do and the loss of the online features would be too much so he doesnt bother. I gotta give credit to this new generation of consoles, their drm really works. Hopefully PC will receive similar drm one day through the gaming alliance.

EDIT: Note *I* dont pirate games - Im just telling you what the reality is atleast here.

[Gorath]

Maybe while we're busy looking in our mirrors, you could take a look in one of your own, Patrick, and ask yourself those kinds of questions.
No personal attacks!

[woges]

It's a personal thing as far as I'm concerned (not a reference to Gorath's above post). Buy it or don't and at the end of the day the sale stats will decide if this is worth it or not. It's not like EA/Bioware don't know this will alienate some customers because DRM has happened in other industries before with similar debates/concerns. Bioshock was the last (literally) game I'll buy with this on excluding Sims 3 as I'll probably buy that for my special lady friend. I think this really pushes on consumer's right's to resell which I'm sure EA (and probably a lot of publishers) wants disposed. For that reason I'll pass on SecuROM.

With that said I'm not saying I'm right and the PC market may need this to survive but if that's the case it can survive without me.

[PatrickWeekes]

Everyone I know irl and plays games owns only 2-3 games at best. They read warezsite news to d/l the newest games for free as soon as they arrive with programs like torrent and dc++. There are "elite" warez insider clubs too where you can d/l them even sooner.

Then everyone you know in real life is pirating software, and when you wonder why software has such huge and unpleasant copy protection, and why software is developed more often first on consoles, rendering PCs the redheaded stepchild of development platforms, you should have an answer that readily springs to mind.

So game makers aren't responsible for the copy protection they put into their games; game buyers are responsible? That's what you're saying, right?

Yes. That is exactly what I'm saying. When the post directly beneath yours talks blithely about how nobody buys software because it's easier to pirate it, then yes, the gamer culture of software piracy gets to take a good hefty portion of blame for the corporate culture of oppressive software protection.

I don't like having to be connected to the Internet to play a single-player RPG. I don't like having to use my CD-drive as a glorified dongle. But I understand why it's happening. It's a response, an attempt to at least cut the casual pirates to stem a little of the blood loss.

That seems awfully convenient to me. While I don't blame game makers for wanting to protect their profits, I think it's a little weak to take pot shots at customers who don't like the sound of being inconvenienced.

Post below yours, man. Shall we talk weak? This isn't a warez site. This is a site ostensibly devoted to love of the genre, and right here, out in the open, with no shame, people are talking casually about pirating.

If people talked casually about stealing money from your company, would that maybe inspire you to get slightly obnoxious about the locks on the doors? Because I'm not pulling in the big bucks. A whole lot of my salary depends on yearly bonus, and a whole lot of that bonus depends on how well our games sell. This isn't a faceless conglomerate of evil nameless people, a system that everyone should feel satisfied to screw over. This is me. This is another guy, the lead systems designer of BioShock, who's active over on ENWorld. This is men and women who are in this because they're trying to make games that people will love, when honestly, we'd be making more as SQL programmers or marketing copywriters.

So, uh, no. I have absolutely no trouble getting behind copy protection. I'll be first in line when something better comes along, a system that doesn't penalize legitimate users as much but offers at least the same level of protection. No argument there. I'll mourn the PC coming in a distant last place in terms of development priorities. But ultimately, I can't blame the higher-ups for making that decision. Too many people think that pirating is an acceptable solution.

If you don't feel a game is worth your money, don't buy it.

Why hasn't the software industry come up with an effective solution to this problem that won't inconvenience loyal customers? Why does it produce so many products that customers feel weren't worth the money they paid for them? And why is it so hard for customers to trust anything the software industry says?

Maybe while we're busy looking in our mirrors, you could take a look in one of your own, Patrick, and ask yourself those kinds of questions.

Dude, I'm a writer. I'm not a programmer. So putting me up as the one who has personally failed if we can't redesign new copy protection standards? Weak.

That said: "Why does it produce so many products that customers feel weren't worth the money they paid for them?" Because young gamers feel justified in pirating. Post below yours. Right there.

You want to sling mud, you go right ahead. Apologize for the pirates. I hope that self-righteous indignation serves you well when the next hot game comes out on the consoles first, and is then dumbed down and ported over to the PC as an afterthought.

[Holly Avenger]

Then everyone you know in real life is pirating software, and when you wonder why software has such huge and unpleasant copy protection, and why software is developed more often first on consoles, rendering PCs the redheaded stepchild of development platforms, you should have an answer that readily springs to mind.



Yes. That is exactly what I'm saying. When the post directly beneath yours talks blithely about how nobody buys software because it's easier to pirate it, then yes, the gamer culture of software piracy gets to take a good hefty portion of blame for the corporate culture of oppressive software protection.


And yet the new measures do absolutely nothing to interrupt the piracy of the game (we all know it will be cracked without too much bother) and instead further punishes those who DO pay out with yet more restrictive DRM.

You're punishing your paying customers far more than you're punishing pirates with these new measures. And that's the truly sad thing about all of this.

[zakhal]

Post below yours, man. Shall we talk weak? This isn't a warez site. This is a site ostensibly devoted to love of the genre, and right here, out in the open, with no shame, people are talking casually about pirating.


Note that *I* dont pirate games or condone it (but I dont preach abt it to my friends either - that would be pointless). Infact I propably own more games than you - if not more than most in this board. I have even planned to take som pictures of my collection one day and show som of it here (just need to borrow camera first).

Point is that pirating is very casual in real life and everyone does it atleast as far as I know. I wanted to bring that fact to this discussion, because so many in this thread dont seem to understand how desperate the need for DRMs is.

I don't like having to be connected to the Internet to play a single-player RPG. I don't like having to use my CD-drive as a glorified dongle. But I understand why it's happening. It's a response, an attempt to at least cut the casual pirates to stem a little of the blood loss.

This same discussion abt mass effect is on other boards too - they complain about those same things while in reality everyone around them is busy as bee d/l latest warez for free (they even talk abt d/l warez on the same boards while complaining abt DRM). I find it immoral and "slightly" annoying.

[Holly Avenger]

(just need to borrow camera first)

Aha! Caught you out there - "borrow camera" indeed you filthy tea leaf :biggrin:

[PatrickWeekes]

Note that *I* dont pirate games or condone it (but I dont preach abt to my friends either - that would be pointless). Infact I propably own more games than you - if not more than most in this board. I have even planned to take som pictures of my collection one day and show som of it here (just need to borrow camera first).

Point is that pirating is very casual in real life and everyone does it atleast as far as I know. I wanted to bring that fact to this discussion, because so many in this thread dont seem to understand the need of DRM.

Sorry -- misunderstood the context of your post.

To the rest: Yell all you like. I have no problem admitting that copy protection sucks. I do play games as well. But I also see enough piracy to know that every corporation out there absolutely must do something to try to slow the blood loss. The fact that it's not the thing that you personally would have them do is one of the harsh realities of life.

[mogwins]

OK, Patrick, I completely understand you wanting to protect your livelihood. That's understandable. From the outset let me state that piracy is wrong and I in no way condone it. I think, however, you're slightly misguided on a few points:

1. Piracy is not destroying the PC market. Piracy's been there for 20 years, since the ZX Spectrum, when Imagine claimed it was destroying the gaming market. There have always been consoles, and in the past they were far more pirate-proof than they are today (it's a damn site easier to pirate any of the major consoles than it was an Atari 2600). Yet the PC gaming market is protifable and persists, as does the lazy developer cry of "My game didn't sell as well as I expected. Piracy!". Imagine made that cry too. The real reason their games stopped selling: Unreasonable expectations and the fact they produced the same shit games with no innovation.

2. Copy protection does not stop piracy. Short of true MMOPRG server-side softeware, all copy protection means is maybe an extra few hours for the game to hit the warez sites. It does succeed, however, it annoying the shit out of legitimate owners, and maybe discouraging a few people from actually buying the game in the first place. One of the biggest selling game of recent times: Oblivion, and not because it had an sophisticated copy protection system.

I'm not saying piracy can't hit sales, but it's nothing like as bad the publishers are shouting about.

[zakhal]

Aha! Caught you out there - "borrow camera" indeed you filthy tea leaf :biggrin:

I dont have a habit of taking pictures nor buying the latest phones (I buy new once the old one breaks) so I simply dont have one. My roommate has camphone though so I could use that but Im not sure of its quality.

I have lots of games old and new spanning the last ~30 years. Full series like ultima, might magic, all ad&d games from the original pool of radiance to the latest nwn2 addon, etc with complete printed documentation and maps. Somtimes I just spend time looking at my bookshelf (overloaded though - need to buy another one). For me its a priceless treasure chest really.

PC games have become quite cheap nowadays. Even new pc games like assasins creed limited edition (metal box etc - 34€ shipping included) or mass effect (40€ shipping included). The games cost almost nothing compared to how many hours of entertainment you get from them. Its just ridiculous that people - especially working people who could easily afford them - think they need to pirate them.

Unreasonable expectations and the fact they produced the same shit games with no innovation.

Thats mainly the fault of piracy. More piracy = less money to developers = more generic games. Thanks to piracy they need to make simplified games that cater to everyones tastes to get the largest target audiance group.

[Squeek]

You want to sling mud, you go right ahead. Apologize for the pirates. I hope that self-righteous indignation serves you well when the next hot game comes out on the consoles first, and is then dumbed down and ported over to the PC as an afterthought.Patrick, you brought up "looking in the mirror" -- not me. It's either fair or not, nice or not. A mod thought my response was personal and warned me, so I won't pursue it. My questions were expressly directed at the entire software industry.

I know a thing or two about being cheated out of money. Some of those stories, I can't even tell, because most people find them too hard to believe. So I don't blame you for not wanting to be cheated or not wanting to have to be subtle about it.

But this is a fan site. We're customers here. I don't mean to crawl in the mud, but that doesn't seem particularly valuable to you.

[Gorath]

mogwins,

your points are both incorrect IMHO.

While the publishers have every reason to exaggerate the effect of piracy, it´s 100% clear that they indeed lose potential customers through piracy. If you assume millions of copies for an AAA title even a small percentage of lost sales quickly adds up to the thousands. Multiply by 50$ average retail price and it makes sense to try to "convince" casual pirates to buy the game.
Hardcore pirates are not interesting. Let them download all they want. What the publishers really want is kill casual piracy. And if this can´t be done - what´s almost always the case - they want to slow it down as much as possible. This makes sense because most games sell the majority of their full-price units in the first few weeks. Every day the CP survives is worth its weight in gold.

Of course publishers also think strategically. They have other goals too. DL has higher margins than retail. So they try to migrate their customers to their DL business. Online activation, registration, Steam, DLC, etc. are good steps to get this process going.
They also want to kill the used games business because they think it hurts them, which is also debatable. Going online improves their situation here too.
Another point is support costs. Verification before support saves them a lot of money. Any ideas for an easy and reliable verification method? ;)


I would also like to point out again that Bio´s activation thing also comes with a plus for the customer: You don´t need the DVD in the drive.

[mogwins]

Gorath, not wanting to be unnecessarily argumentative, but I don't think you addressed why you think my points are wrong?

I presume if you think point 1 is wrong than you think piracy IS killing the game industry. You have to admit, it's a very long, drawn-out death that started the moment it was conceived, and at the present it's looking very healthy. When exactly is going to die, because all I see is an industry getting stronger and stronger, more and more profitable?

As for point 2, if we're completely ignoring the main pirates and looking at only school-yard swapping, then yes, copy protection might do something. I don't have any numbers to hand, but I suspect losses such effects are VERY small. And people have always swapped games, PC or console.

The copy protection we're talking about here, as adopted by Mass Effect, is an attempt to produce consumers who buy something but don't have the right to sell it on. Thus you don't purchase Mass Effect, you rent it (because if I buy a film on DVD, I have the right to sell it on, whereas if I rent it, I don't). And if that's really the stance EA wants to take, then they'd better price their product accordingly!

[Saerden]

tl;dr version:
DRM Supporters / Piracy haters use moral arguments that target torrent pirates, and use actions that have no effect on them, but target "casual pirates" (=legit consumer practice).

"Piracy is evil, it is destroying everything, look at all those torrent sites, all hives of scum and villany. Yet we dont do anything about them, we instead target YOU. Stop giving things you own to your friends. Stop selling on things you own after you no longer need them. Stop using things you own the way you want. Seriously, piracy is evil."


Long version

Dont have time or motivation (or talent) to write out a post where i pretend to be a camera-manufacturer that accuses one of the above poster (the one who admitted casual camera piracy) of being an evil, camera-industry destroying freeloader who wants all the benefits without paying for all the hard work those camera-manufacturers poored into their product, so just imagining something along those lines . Lots of moral self-entitlement and reality denial about something most people consider natural (borrowing physical objects from friends).




Now seriously. What if the camera came with a piece of paper that said:
You dont buy the product, you buy the non-transferable licence to use it. Then, according to those twisted morals, the person would be everything the industry(R) and fabois(C) club(tm) accuses pirates to be. 3 lines of text that would change everything.


People who use ad-blockers: amoral, internet destroying scum.
(there are actually sites that have TOS that state that you are not allowed to view the site while using ad-blockers)

Ever taken the sports pages of a newspaper while your father read the politics and economy section? Why not buy your own product, you filthy thief? You are the reason why journalism is in constant decline.

Ever let your daughter take your car? How many jobs were lost (or moved to China) because of the crisis of US car manufacturers? You have destroyed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people who are now unemployed.

Ever taken a "break" during a commercial? You are a criminal, nothing more to say.

Pirates are to blame for DRM? Crackers enjoy the challenge, and pirates never see the DRM. DRM affects casual users and neighbourhood sharing, things that everyone takes for granted with everything but software. Things that used to be legal not long ago. The attitude changed with software (all those DRM supporters freely acknowledge that DRM doesnt stop elite release groups or torrents, they refer to kiddies and casuals as main targets (and 0-day piracy, but that one is actually legitimate)). Will you (the software developers, for everyone else its obvious) really be better of when the attitude spreads? Will total controll over your work but total loss of controll over everything else be better then the status quo?

Sounds harsh? It doesnt so far off ... the problem with a reality-denying stance (sometimes refered to "morals") is that you are *always* a hypocrite.

Now obviously, zero-day piracy (mostly refering to people who would have bought the game if piracy was impossible) is "morally" wrong (on a economical level - not passing judgement on wether "property" is a moral concept or just a practical one that helps boost economy). Playing games you would normally not buy or be able to afford is problematic.

If the answer of Software developers in response to piracy is to leave the PC plattform, i support this step. It is exactly how a healthy free market should work. If something is not sustainable, then it needs to go (unless there are strong humanitarian interests - healthcare for the elderly etc). Everyone says the status quo is not sustainable ... so find a business model that is (MMO, free flash games, etc etc). People who want old-school singleplayer games should pay true market price (possibly with premium), not whine for subsidy from the general population.


Look at all those "free to play" games. Only a small small minority really pays (and a even smaller minority forks over serious cash), yet without all the freeloaders, there would be no game, no user-base to draw in fresh "victims", no community etc. And the model works, as it is all over the place now, with major titles (Mythos) adopting it.

It is very possible that the entire software business has been a poor shadow of a "free-to-play" scheme all this time without realising it.




I think in the long run, treating financial supporters as heroes will prove more successful then treating freeloaders as villians. Donationware with strong, unpirateable benefits for top supporters, and lots of nods to regular ones, should be tried alot more often (think custom forum titles, NPCs named after donators, minor or major game content somehow related to the identities and personalities , custom art / wallpapers, just a "thank you, it really means alot to us" news article etc etc).

[Squeek]

Other industries try just about everything they can imagine to get customers to buy their products. The software industry requires its customers to enter into a binding contract before they can even look at theirs -- even after they've bought it.

Other industries try their best to retain existing customers. The software industry tells you to consider yourself lucky. You're crooks until you prove otherwise. "We don't need to be nice to you; you need to be nice to us."

Do you know why that is? It's because business is good. Whenever business is good, some people get the idea that they don't have to be nice anymore. Not to customers, anyway. Not when there's plenty to go around.

Ive seen it over and over again. It's typical. It's small. And it's temporary.

[zakhal]

Other industries try their best to retain existing customers. The software industry tells you to consider yourself lucky. You're crooks until you prove otherwise. "We don't need to be nice to you; you need to be nice to us."

But thats perfectly logical. Unlike in "other industries" (how many camera thiefs do you know?) in software business piracy - especially pc game piracy - is out of control. Of course they assume every customer is a pirate because most are. Its simply true.

[mogwins]

Of course they assume every customer is a pirate because most are. Its simply true.

No, the pirates are not customers, and the customers are not pirates. Software companies appear to be making the same mistake.

[zakhal]

No, the pirates are not customers, and the customers are not pirates. Software companies appear to be making the same mistake.

Define a customer. Customer is somone who doesnt pirate games. How many such persons do you know who have never pirated a single game in their whole life? I dont know a single one. Everyone is a potential pirate so they get treated as such.

[Gorath]

Gorath, not wanting to be unnecessarily argumentative, but I don't think you addressed why you think my points are wrong?
Maybe I was a bit too crytic because I didn´t want to write a novel. ;)

I presume if you think point 1 is wrong than you think piracy IS killing the game industry. You have to admit, it's a very long, drawn-out death that started the moment it was conceived, and at the present it's looking very healthy.This quote illustrates the main problem I have with your arguments. You are arguing in black & white while our world is gray.
Of course piracy is a problem. Make it however small you want, but it has a negative impact on sales. If a problem has been identified one has every right to tackle it. Whether or nor the means are adequate is a different question.
Piracy is for sure one of the reasons why the conventional retail PC business is losing ground quickly. There are certainly many others, but it´s still one of them.

When exactly is going to die, because all I see is an industry getting stronger and stronger, more and more profitable?
Really? I only see small PC-centric publishers go out of business or only survive by a hairbreadth. Examples? CDV, JoWooD (twice), DreamCatcher, Frogster, Ascaron, Atari, EIDOS, Midway, Interplay ... the list is endless.
AFAIR the numbers for full price PC games are shrinking while the whole market is growing 20+%. Where are all the coregamers going? Here are a few ideas or observations:
- WoW binds millions of people. Many of them have stopped buying anything else.
- The business is increasingly hit driven. The medium products no longer sell. You either have a huge hit or hopefully calculated carefully that low numbers are enough.
- Or combined with WoW: They buy only a few premium titles in addition to WoW. No experiments. Oblivion, Need for Speed, CoD.
- Consoles have gotten better.
- Plus many attractive games come for them first.
- Online sales are not counted, so maybe the numbers are slightly incorrect.
- The new generations of gamers are no longer hardcore. For them gaming is normal. They play games like they watch movies: instant action. Consume, have fun, forget, move on.
- Coregamers are getting older, move on to other hobbies, have less time or simply an outdated PC. They leave.

As for point 2, if we're completely ignoring the main pirates and looking at only school-yard swapping, then yes, copy protection might do something. I don't have any numbers to hand, but I suspect losses such effects are VERY small. And people have always swapped games, PC or console. Yes, very small. But Very small times how many? ;) Game swapping is not much of a problem. Let 10 people buy one game each and then swap. That´s okay.
There are many ways to sell a unit if the CP works:
- Early adopters MUST have it NOW.
- Late adopters can buy it for 10 bucks. That´s still better than no sale.
- Peer pressure. Everybody is playing it.
- Longer exposure to marketing.
- Another chance with the demo.
- Some people have the budget, are generally willing to buy but try to copy first because it´s cost effective.
- The charts. It´s in the top 10, I need it.
- Impulse buys.
- many more
I would say each of these filters will deliver a small, positive number of results if applied to a large number of casual pirates. That´s worth going for. Especially because CP is cheap.
Here is a small calculation:
Game A sells 100k. It´s copied 1M times. If the publisher can convince only 1% of the pirates to buy the game it means 10k sales. The result is a whopping 10% (!) increase in units sold. Plus additional positive effect on the retail presence.


The copy protection we're talking about here, as adopted by Mass Effect, is an attempt to produce consumers who buy something but don't have the right to sell it on. Thus you don't purchase Mass Effect, you rent it (because if I buy a film on DVD, I have the right to sell it on, whereas if I rent it, I don't). And if that's really the stance EA wants to take, then they'd better price their product accordingly!
Oh, I sort of agree with this. EA certainly has more than one reason to use such a CP. Their system changes the equation. It makes Mass Effect less attractive for me. Maybe the masses don´t care. That´s my expectation.
MMO players also don´t have a reason to get angry. Their MMO authentificates itself every single time they log in.

[mogwins]

Gorath, I do see your point on a number of issues, and yes, I do reduce to black'n'white, but it's purely for illustration's sake: I know the real world is never so simple.

I think the point I was trying to make about piracy killing the PC gaming industry is this: If you look back to any point in the last 20 years you'll find plenty of developers blaming poor sales on piracy, and stating piracy is killing PC gaming market and that consoles are the only way to go. During that same period, however, you'll find an equal number of developers making huge profits in the same market. What's the difference - better copy protection systems? No, the latter is simply making games people want to buy rather than churning out the same rubbish year after year.

As for you hypothetical numbers, you're correct, extra sales software companies can claw back from pirates are a huge potential source of extra income. The key assumption you're making though, is that if those people couldn't pirate the game (e.g., because of 100% efficient protection) then they'd buy the game. I'm not sure that's the case. A good chunk of software pirates download stuff because they can, not because they want the software. Starve them of an illegal, free source of a game, and I'm betting they no longer want it. Most of them are not potential customers. Maybe your 10% is reasonable - I don't know.

[Squeek]

But thats perfectly logical. Unlike in "other industries" (how many camera thiefs do you know?) in software business piracy - especially pc game piracy - is out of control. Of course they assume every customer is a pirate because most are. Its simply true.Every one of my friends and neighbors owns a computer, but I'm probably the only one who even knows the first thing about downloading pirated software. And that's only due to all my years of high-tech industry experience.

There are still plenty of PC users who "oooh and ahhh" over simple things like Alt-Tabbing between applications. They're the ones who are the most inconvenienced by this stuff, because they're the least capable of dealing with the potential headaches involved with it.

Here's the difference between piracy and camera theft. Each time a camera is stolen, someone steals a camera. But only one person has to pirate software, because it can then be copied and distributed.

When pirated software becomes available to download freely via the Internet, it's as if it's been set out on a curb where the entire world passes by, one where everyone can plainly see that it's there free for the taking.

I don't think it's asking too much for people to be honest, but the circumstances are awfully tempting. The software industry has been faced with this situation for a long time. It's fair to expect them to stop blaming everyone else and start accepting some responsibility for it.

[zakhal]

Every one of my friends and neighbors owns a computer, but I'm probably the only one who even knows the first thing about downloading pirated software. And that's only due to all my years of high-tech industry experience.

They have never pirated a single game? Good for them. I dont know anyone who hasnt pirated a game - hightech experience or not - somwhere along their life - alone or with the help of their friends. Everyone I know did it atleast to som extent with C64, Amiga and then PC.

As long as piracy is possible there will always be pirates. The only way to prevent that is proper DRM like the one in current console generation or one in the past (i.e nintendo 64 i doubt anyone copied those games back then).


I don't think it's asking too much for people to be honest, but the circumstances are awfully tempting. The software industry has been faced with this situation for a long time. It's fair to expect them to stop blaming everyone else and start accepting some responsibility for it.

They are taking responsibility. Its just a bumby road to get there. Sooner or later though they will make breakthrough DRM for PC. Whether it will be hardware one like in consoles, or client-server based or both we will see.

[woges]

MMOs are a different subject really there is no need for a consistent server with monitoring and extensive support for a single player RPG (and I don't know of a single MMO that won't let you install after a certain amount of installs). This is just EA's decision on how they are going to publish to PC - for all their games I guess. That's fine, I made a decision not to buy games with SecuROM after the purchase of Bioshock because I do not agree with this ethos. Which is handing over the right of use of the purchased product to the publisher. You know you're doing this when you play an MMO but the trade is the on-line social experience. I think if a published date for SecuROM removal was added to games I'd have no problem with it but are there any instances of it ever happening?

[Holly Avenger]

At the end of the day, as a consumer and paying customer I really don't care about the reasons behind the addition of this DRM. Is it to stop piracy? The resale market? I don't care. Only one thing matters for me: Is the purchase offering me what I want to buy for the price requested.

The simple answer is, for me, no it's not. I don't want something that takes control of how and when I can play the game out of my hands to such an extent. I want to buy a game and know it's mine, and barring any physical damage to the media, or the quality of the hardware I'm playing it on (both completely under my control) that game is mine to do with as I please. As soon as there are conditions placed on that transaction it becomes a far less lucrative deal. When "what if" questions crop up that may result in me being unable to play that game down the line through no fault of my own (nor any ability for me to control) then something is wrong. Seriously wrong.

Yes, something needs to be done about piracy. I hate it too - it leads to things like this ruining things for me as much as for the developers. But this is not the way to solve the problem. It's a false path. And I think Bioware will ultimately learn that the hard way.

[Saerden]

And that "breakthrough DRM" will lead them to promised land where the revenue keeps flowing.

Or maybe it will do exactly what it is expected to do, lead to a total congruence of paying customers and users. Then the industry still has the very same problem they have now - making people pay for their stuff.

When piracy is dead, customers may find other excuses not to pay, and then what?

Its kind of funny how perspectives change. In "GTA murdered 10 cops today" discussions, people complain how gaming is still socially not accepted and too far away from the mainstream. Do you think the situation would be better if all those evil schoolyard piracy kiddies spent their time playing games they actually could afford (=street soccer) instead of growing up to be gamers (with well-paid jobs)?

[kalniel]

People aren't buying enough PC games as it is, so why not at least give beating piracy a go before bowing out and ignoring the PC?

[zakhal]

Aha! Caught you out there - "borrow camera" indeed you filthy tea leaf :biggrin:

Since you asked:
http://users.jyu.fi/~jansilla/Kuva005.jpg
http://users.jyu.fi/~jansilla/kuva004nt6.jpg
Thats the shelf. I have more games in the cellar - mostly 90s ones. Also I have plenty in steam or otherways digitally purchased (i.e galciv expansions or matrix games). Many of my games have also been lost, borrowed-and-never-returned, broken or sold during the years.

Hers som of my ultima collection and other treasures:
http://users.jyu.fi/~jansilla/Kuva006.jpg

http://users.jyu.fi/~jansilla/Kuva007.jpg
Arkana trilogy & add 8 game collectors edition both still in wrappers. Also a 700 page manual for dangerous waters (who said they dont make manuals anymore?)

Sorry for the poor quality of the pictures. :)

[Holly Avenger]

Whoa, that's a creaky old overloaded shelf!

And that was a joke comment before, in case you thought otherwise... can be hard to judge intent behind forum comments, but I in no way really was calling into question the veracity of your comments. I just liked the "borrow" comment when talking of proving your not a thief ;)

[zakhal]

...

I know. :) Its just that Ive been planning to get som pics for long time now. But as you can see the quality is pretty bad. I need to buy a real camera. And a shelf perhaps (Im so lucky we dont have earthquakes here).

[Alrik Fassbauer]

I dont know a single one.

Me. Except for a game that's not available for *at least* 15 years. And that only recently and by chance (I had been searching for it too long ...).

[zakhal]

Me. Except for a game that's not available for *at least* 15 years. And that only recently and by chance (I had been searching for it too long ...).

What game was it if I may ask? :) Some old ones are almost impossible to get.

[Dhruin]

I think the point I was trying to make about piracy killing the PC gaming industry is this: If you look back to any point in the last 20 years you'll find plenty of developers blaming poor sales on piracy, and stating piracy is killing PC gaming market and that consoles are the only way to go. During that same period, however, you'll find an equal number of developers making huge profits in the same market. What's the difference - better copy protection systems? No, the latter is simply making games people want to buy rather than churning out the same rubbish year after year.

I think you're massively off the mark. I would suggest there's as much (more?) chance that the games that are selling are "more of the same", but backed by a license, a slick marketing campaign or bleeding edge graphics while the ones that fail are just as often the innovative products.

Off the top of my head I can't think of a single major publisher that hasn't posted a loss at some point in recent years and many of the smaller ones just aren't there any more. There are many reasons for this (including, no doubt, poor product line ups that are their own fault) but because Blizzard and Valve gather headlines for their massive sales doesn't mean the industry is coasting along.

It's different now because torrents mean piracy distribution is orders of magnitude bigger than 20 years ago and because most genres can simply move to consoles.

Is the PC industry in good shape when you count WoW and Peggle and Bejeweled and Habbo Hotel? Probably. Is that really what you want to play? I don't.

[Dhruin]

At the end of the day, as a consumer and paying customer I really don't care about the reasons behind the addition of this DRM. Is it to stop piracy? The resale market? I don't care. Only one thing matters for me: Is the purchase offering me what I want to buy for the price requested.

Just curious because I think this one point represents a significant divide in attitudes - what price do you put on your entertainment?

For me, a game represents excellent value for my entertainment dollar. If I play a game through - and enjoy it - I've experienced the $80 (local price) worth of value and I'm satisfied.

So what price is right for you in this instance? Assuming you can't gurarantee replayability beyond a couple of minor upgrades in this case (which promises, what, at least a few months or maybe a year or two?), what price do you put on the initial experience?

[mogwins]

Dhruin: Ah, the classic internet debate tactic of ignoring my main point (you know, the one in bold) and building your argument against a minor point (which types of games do/don't sell). ;) But I agree, the innovative games are often the ones that suffer - all markets are scared by the unknown, and it takes some clever advertising (which requires major financial backing) to persuade the public otherwise.

On the main point, I think we might just have to agree to disagree. As a parting shot, however, let me try rephrase: The PC game development industry, like every industry, has some companies that flourish, some that fail. Always has, always will. The difference with the PC gaming industry is that instead of attributing failure to stiff competition, poor product, poor marketing, changes in the market or any other of the very real reasons businesses fail, a large majority of them simply cry "piracy!". Now, for a very few select companies this might actually be the case, but everytime sales don't meet expectations? No.

Finally, let me also say that if you really want to assess how the PC market is doing, you need to compare PC returns with returns from similar console publishers, not take them in isolation (also remember that all the major source of units sold don't consider on-line distribution, such as Steam, which form a large part of PC gaming sales). Many gaming companies are so new they expect some time before they post a profit. Furthermore, the US is on the brink of a recession - companies are struggling in all walks of business, and you'd be hard pushed to blame piracy there.

[Dhruin]

Well, it wasn't a tactic to ignore your bold point - I was thinking about a number of things and ended up addressing only some. Off to work, so I'll respond when I get the chance.

[mogwins]

Yeah, I know. I was joking on that point.

[Squeek]

It must be difficult to estimate with any amount of certainty how much impact piracy has on a game's sales. There's too much guesswork involved.

If someone were to steal 100 copies of Mass Effect and then stand out on a street corner and pass them out, one at a time, then how much would that impact Mass Effect's sales? It would mean a loss of 100 sales if every one who got the game for free would have otherwise bought it.

But what if none of them ever would have bought it? Then it would have had no impact on sales. The inventory would be lost, but that would be all (and the cost that would be insignificant).

So it's not a question of how many people play pirated games. It's a question of how many of those people would have otherwise bought those games.

How do you figure that out? Beats me.

[kalniel]

The PC game development industry, like every industry, has some companies that flourish, some that fail. Always has, always will. The difference with the PC gaming industry is that instead of attributing failure to stiff competition, poor product, poor marketing, changes in the market or any other of the very real reasons businesses fail, a large majority of them simply cry "piracy!". Now, for a very few select companies this might actually be the case, but everytime sales don't meet expectations? No. So are you saying that actually the entire AAA PC industry, except Blizzard (which co-incidentally, happens to have a game mechanism that is pointless to pirate), is simultaneously suffering from over competition, poor product, poor marketing and other bad business situations?

(also remember that all the major source of units sold don't consider on-line distribution, such as Steam, which form a large part of PC gaming sales). It's not the sales rankings that are complaining about the piracy problem, it's the developers/publishers themselves - they have the real sales figures, not the charts.

Furthermore, the US is on the brink of a recession - companies are struggling in all walks of business, and you'd be hard pushed to blame piracy there.Then why are video games sales up so much as a whole?


But what if none of them ever would have bought it? Then it would have had no impact on sales. The inventory would be lost, but that would be all (and the cost that would be insignificant).

So it's not a question of how many people play pirated games. It's a question of how many of those people would have otherwise bought those games.

How do you figure that out? Beats me.A good point, and perhaps it could be argued that where once PC gaming was the hobby on only a few geeks, piracy has enabled a wider audience to take part who wouldn't otherwise part with money for a game. But on the other hand, console sales just seem to fly in the face of that one - why should people prefer playing the game on a console so much more than on a PC? In fact, why are they willing to pay more to do so as well?

[fatBastard()]

Oh man, I'm going to love living in the brand new world some of you are trying to pass off as acceptable.

First I'll start this Friday evening off with going to the movies. I'll just go in watch the flick and then I'll decide if I feel like it is worth my money or not. Then I'll go to a great restaurant and when I'm full from a delicious dinner I'll call on the waiter and tell him I'm not going to pay for me meal, and it'll go something like this:

Me: I'm not going to pay. The meal didn't meet me expectations.
Waiter: Sir?
Me: Yes, I didn't get the "Steak Feel", you know?
Waiter: But you ordered Fish and Chips sir ...
Me: Yes, well I was EXPECTING a steak, so I'm not going to pay.

To round the evening off I'll go visit a fine prostitute and I'm sure that afterwards her "manager" will accept my argument that I was merely "trying before buying" and let me off scot-free.

Yes, that'll be a nice evening ... of course, by the same time next week the cinema and the restaurant will both have closed down due to unpaid bills and the lady of questionable ethics will be working at the local fish factory where she'll be paid for her services.

I'm sorry, but I just don't accept the "oh but I won't have bought it anyway" argument. You play it, you pay. End of story.

"Oh but I don't feel the price is right". Yes, well I don't feel the price on real estate is fair to a regular working Joe like me, but that doesn't make it alright for me to go "squatting" (is that the correct term for unlawful occupation of a building?) the house I want to live in now does it? Again: You play, you pay.

What I really don't understand in this particular case is that no matter how one feels towards piracy there is a general consensus that the CP scheme on Mass Effect will be broken within days or even hours, so even IF EA/Bioware should break their promise to disable the online check once/if the service shuts down, does anyone here honestly believe that a fix for this will NOT be available on the web? Seriously?!?

The whole "I want to be able to play the game whenever I want, even 10 years from now" argument is somewhat flawed because you can't do that with 10 year old games now, can you? In order to get most of your games from the 90'ies to run on your current XP or Vista PC's you have to install a third party program to make it work. So when push comes to shove: What is the difference between installing DOSBox and installing a "No Online Check" patch?

[zakhal]

face of that one - why should people prefer playing the game on a console so much more than on a PC? In fact, why are they willing to pay more to do so as well?

Best sports and driving games are only on the newest consoles. The prime genres for many pirates I know. Infact EA just recently ceased to make sports games for PC alltogether.

Today a person told me that there is an email campaign going on against mass effect due to its DRM and how he was joining it. He will propably just pirate the game now. I found it funny because he most likely would not have bought the game anyways DRM or not. Its just an extra excuse to pirate it - hypocritical at that.

This is a person who pirated games like witcher and more lately assasins creed. He has never owned any bioware games or rpgs. He owns like 5% of games (i.e multiplayer games to get to legal servers) he plays while spending hundreds of hours playing them.


So it's not a question of how many people play pirated games. It's a question of how many of those people would have otherwise bought those games.

Well most of the people I know spend huge amount of time playing the pirated games. They have gaming fridays with multiple people playing. Somtimes they have tournaments that are played every evening. Somtimes its all they do on their freetime.

I know a one fellow who bought like 40-50% of games he owned. He even liked to preach against piracy. He was kind of high moral person but still pirated half of his games (and played them a lot too).

Most people pirate like 95% of the games like there is som rule that if you buy one pc game you are entitled to download nine for free. I guess it can feel like the right thing to do if everyone does it.

[15th]

The whole "I want to be able to play the game whenever I want, even 10 years from now" argument is somewhat flawed because you can't do that with 10 year old games now, can you? In order to get most of your games from the 90'ies to run on your current XP or Vista PC's you have to install a third party program to make it work. So when push comes to shove: What is the difference between installing DOSBox and installing a "No Online Check" patch?

I was mostly agreeing until upto here. How is using OS/PC emulation or virtualisation in line with using a crack? This type of app (?) is becoming more common, and the crack on it's own is not going to get it to run on a non-supported system.

If the game works in this case, you will most likely need the cd-numbers or code-in-manuals.

[fatBastard()]

I was mostly agreeing until upto here. How is using OS/PC emulation or virtualisation in line with using a crack? This type of app (?) is becoming more common, and the crack on it's own is not going to get it to run on a non-supported system.

If the game works in this case, you will most likely need the cd-numbers or code-in-manuals.

If you, like me, own a legal copy of "Legend of Kyrandia 3: Malcolm's Revenge" but can not play the game without first installing DOSBox and we now pretend we're 10 years in the future and EA/BioWare have just discontinued the online service handling the activation of own legal Mass Effect for PC copies without releasing an official patch to remove the online check ... then my question was this: What is the difference between applying a third party software package (DOSBox) in order to get your legal LoK Malcolm's Revenge to work and applying a third party software package (No Online Check) in order to get your legal Mass Effect to? You say tomaatoes, I say TomAtoes?

Be it an emulation program or a crack/patch, you're still utilizing both in order to play your legal games. The problem with piracy is not what you do to your own legal copy (using it as a Frisbee or applying No-CD cracks). The problem is the parasites who won't pay for the games they play.

[Holly Avenger]

I was mostly agreeing until upto here. How is using OS/PC emulation or virtualisation in line with using a crack? This type of app (?) is becoming more common, and the crack on it's own is not going to get it to run on a non-supported system.

If the game works in this case, you will most likely need the cd-numbers or code-in-manuals.

It's mostly rubbish anyway - nearly all of my 90's games still work just fine thankyou. If we're talking 80's games then yes, some hoops are required - but all you're doing is creating the appropriate environment for them to run normally... you're not hacking the game itself in any way, it's purely the operating system environment that's being manipulated to make it more like what the game expects... something we've done with games for many, many years (e.g. upgrading display drivers because the game won't run - is that a hack now too?).

[Alrik Fassbauer]

What game was it if I may ask? :) Some old ones are almost impossible to get.

It was "The Beauty and the Beast" by Disney. DOS version. I just couldn't find it anymore, and to my greatest delight someone I think mailed me a copy. :)

My, was I happy !!! :) Because the demo had been one of my very, very, very first games on the PC ever ! :)

[Steel_Wind]

Amount of actual inconvenience posed to overwhelmingly vast percentage of customers?: minimal

Amount of drama surrounding discussion of said copy protection scheme?: maximal

The drama on this thread is frikkin unbelievable.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

The whole "I want to be able to play the game whenever I want, even 10 years from now" argument is somewhat flawed because you can't do that with 10 year old games now, can you? In order to get most of your games from the 90'ies to run on your current XP or Vista PC's you have to install a third party program to make it work. So when push comes to shove: What is the difference between installing DOSBox and installing a "No Online Check" patch?

You don't know that there are things like FreeDOS and PTSDOS out there ?

But on the other had: Windows has become so overly complex that we won't be able to to play our current games in 10 or 20 years. No way, because I don't see any way to build a thing like DOSBOX in the same manner to emulate current windows.

The only way, then, would be the use of an VM-environment, which would - in the case of windows xp - mean that the OS would like to contect Microsoft in order to let itself be activated. Which most probable won't be answered by *any* MS Server in 20 years or so.

So, you work around with a 30-days installation of windows xp, when you try to play games of today in 20 years.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Amount of actual inconvenience posed to overwhelmingly vast percentage of customers?: minimal

Amount of drama surrounding discussion of said copy protection scheme?: maximal



Absolutely great ! :D

The far best entry in this discussion this far ! :D ;)

[zakhal]

It was "The Beauty and the Beast" by Disney. DOS version. I just couldn't find it anymore, and to my greatest delight someone I think mailed me a copy. :)

My, was I happy !!! :) Because the demo had been one of my very, very, very first games on the PC ever ! :)

I did a quick lookup and didnt find any referance to it from mobygames, wikipedia or ebay. But it was in underdog games. Funnily though its not shared there: :)
Since this game is copyrighted by an ESA member (former the IDSA), or its subsidiary thereof, we are not permitted to distribute it due to the ESA notice. Please contact the company directly to either sell it to you, release it into the public domain, or give us the permission to distribute.

http://www.the-underdogs.info/game.php?id=111


Usually they only protect games that are still sold (i.e eye of the beholder series in forgotten realms archives) but this one seems like an exception.

[15th]

....

Ahh, gotcha. I just misinterpreted your post.

It's mostly rubbish anyway - nearly all of my 90's games still work just fine thankyou. If we're talking 80's games then yes, some hoops are required.

Exactly!

[skavenhorde]

I've been to the Bioware forums and RPGcodex and got to say this is the hottest topic around. A lot of people are screaming "Big Brother" and "What if they want to play it 50 years from now." 50 years!!! I can't even imagine what the world would be like or what computers would be. Hopefully I'll be dead and buried in 50 years time, if not I'll be one cranky old guy bitching about how games used to be good ;)

Anyways, I don't like the ET phone home thing but I'll deal with it at first if I want to play it when it is first released. Anyone who is concerned about the DRM protection do you seriously think that there won't be a crack. Especially now, I can just imagine all the hackers drooling over who will be first to crack this game. I don't support pirating in any form but cracking a game so you don't have to put in a cd everytime you want to play or "Phone home" I've no problems doing. I bought the dang thang, please just let me enjoy it without having to search my games for one DVD. So everyone with this concern just wait to buy it after the crack is released in a few weeks after the release.

For this game I don't think I'll need the crack since they got rid of my biggest pet peeve with being able to play it without needing a DVD in the drive. So what if it phones home every 5 days or so. My concern is that I don't always just play one game. I'm always bouncing around different games and sometimes will let one go for a month or two before revisiting it. What about then? My 10 day experation date will have expired, LMAO it has about the same shelf life of milk now. I guess I'll have to crack it once it has "expired" or deal with EA tech support *shiver*

[Prime Junta]

Amount of actual inconvenience posed to overwhelmingly vast percentage of customers?: minimal

Amount of drama surrounding discussion of said copy protection scheme?: maximal

The drama on this thread is frikkin unbelievable.

Hear hear.

[skavenhorde]

Amount of actual inconvenience posed to overwhelmingly vast percentage of customers?: minimal

Amount of drama surrounding discussion of said copy protection scheme?: maximal

The drama on this thread is frikkin unbelievable.

Really?.... unbelievable? Turn on the news and you'll see drama everywhere about non-issues. Not just this thread but everywhere you go there seems to be more drama about stupid innane stuff. I blame it on the election and Britney Spears :biggrin:

[Ionstormsucks]

What Bioware does is the next logical step to fight piracy - as sad as it is. Piracy alone is not the problem - the fast distribution of illegal copies over the internet is. Bioware are just using the medium for their own means - and personally, I cannot see how anything could be wrong with that, as long as Bioware makes clear on the box that you'll need an open internet connection to play the game.

It's of course not fair, because some people won't be able to play it, but then again - piracy isn't very fair either. It will be interesting to see how this will turn out for Bioware.

Thus said, I think we will see a pirated copy of the game anyway... it will just take a bit longer - or not, depending on when exactely a release group will get their hands on the game.

EDIT: What I find interesting is that hardly anyone complains about the fact that you can only activate the game on three different computers.

[fatBastard()]

It's mostly rubbish anyway - nearly all of my 90's games still work just fine thankyou. If we're talking 80's games then yes, some hoops are required - but all you're doing is creating the appropriate environment for them to run normally... you're not hacking the game itself in any way, it's purely the operating system environment that's being manipulated to make it more like what the game expects... something we've done with games for many, many years (e.g. upgrading display drivers because the game won't run - is that a hack now too?).

And mine do too which is why I specifically chose a 90'ies game that will NOT run on XP/Vista machines in my example. ;)

Does applying a crack physically hurt you? Do you have to click on the mouse in a certain way in order to install a No-CD fix? If not, then why should it matter to you what kind of software you install on your PC in order to get your legally purchased game to run? What we're talking about here (or at least what I was talking about) is what steps is necessary to circumvent a no longer existing support for your game. It doesn't matter how much you payed for Malcolm's Revenge, it just will not run on XP. However you CAN get it to run by installing DOSBox (or FreeDOS or PTSDOS or whatever the different third party alternatives are called). The same is hypothetically the case with Mass Effect in the future where the online service has been taken down, which makes it impossible to run the game unless you install a crack.

My concern is that I don't always just play one game. I'm always bouncing around different games and sometimes will let one go for a month or two before revisiting it. What about then? My 10 day experation date will have expired, LMAO it has about the same shelf life of milk now. I guess I'll have to crack it once it has "expired" or deal with EA tech support *shiver*
All it means is that every 10 days it will do the check. If you play for 10 days straight it will only connect once but if you play 1 time every 10 days then it will connect every time you start the game. That's it. You're not locked out unless it can't connect after the 10 days or your key has been banned.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Usually they only protect games that are still sold (i.e eye of the beholder series in forgotten realms archives) but this one seems like an exception.

Yes it is: Because of the company that made them. Infogrames. I regard it that because the company's still there and powerful, they don't include it.

A similar fate had Hare Raising Havoc[/url[, the Roger Rabbit game, by the way. Never found it, too.

There was a 16-colours version out there for the PC; the screenshots seen via this link appear to be from the Amiga version of the game.

The "Beauty & The Beast" game I meant was this: http://www.thelegacy.de/Museum/7453/

It was once - for a short time - published by the late WordPerfect company, shortly before it was bought by Novell - a move that made Microdsoft Office even stronger, because Novell was and still is a purely Network Company, which utterly fails to market anything Else Than This.

I once saw the WordPerfect version of the game in a warehouse, but I was a student then and didn't have enough money for a full-priced game. Then the warehouse closed and I never saw it again.

WordPerfect published it (and some other things) in their "Main Street" product range / label, so they did with Wallobee Jack & the Secret of the Sphinx, a nice game I once found (and bought) in a second hand games shop. It had the same "Main Street" packaging.

Another one of my very, very, very first games ever ( ;) ) was the demo of the very first Micro Machines game for the PC. I played it with my uncle, and we were laughing over it, because it was so funny ! :)

I sought it for a very, very long time, until i found it in a shop in Berlin which is seemingly specialized on older games. It's called the "Media Tunnel". They seem to habe specialized in older games - which I noticed when I heard the price they wanted for the full game. I have successfully forgotten it, because it was so high. Nevertheless I bought the full game - and found out that it has the craziest copy protection I ever witnessed: "polished" black letters or signs (don't remembver anymore) on a matt black background ... You can see it [url=http://www.thelegacy.de/Museum/game.php3?titel_id=4820&game_id=4862]here (http://www.thelegacy.de/Museum/7453/) as the black "code card" ...
So, you can read it only by distinguishing the "polished" letters from the matt background ... which is imho absolutely crazy - and therefore highly effective ...
Of the second game of this series I've got the so-called Special Edition (http://www.thelegacy.de/Museum/game.php3?titel_id=5936&game_id=5987) ...

[Alrik Fassbauer]

I've been to the Bioware forums and RPGcodex and got to say this is the hottest topic around. A lot of people are screaming "Big Brother" and "What if they want to play it 50 years from now." 50 years!!! I can't even imagine what the world would be like or what computers would be. Hopefully I'll be dead and buried in 50 years time, if not I'll be one cranky old guy bitching about how games used to be good ;)

You miss a certain point: The actual waste of work, creativeness and inspiration used to develop these games.

Waste insofar as the time as long as you can play the game is considerably shortened. At one point in the future you might even not be able to play it anymore.

You can play board games still 50 years after their release, if they've been kept under good circumstances.

Not so long computer and video games.

Notice something ? Our attention span shortens ...

[Ionstormsucks]

I've been to the Bioware forums and RPGcodex and got to say this is the hottest topic around. A lot of people are screaming "Big Brother" and "What if they want to play it 50 years from now."

Well, Bioware adressed that problem in their thread:


Q: What happens in the future if I want to play MEPC and EA has shut off the servers?

A: If that should ever happen, BioWare would address this problem.

[zakhal]

The casual attitude towards piracy is just amazing. I post in one of the biggest finnish boards and there people post slogans like "P******ay - Its simply stupid to pay for games" (p******ay is the swedish torrent site).

They say that even though they have money their principles stop them from buying anything, because its freely available. Or that they save nature by copying only bits. Its not only accepted its recommended.

[skavenhorde]

You miss a certain point: The actual waste of work, creativeness and inspiration used to develop these games.

Waste insofar as the time as long as you can play the game is considerably shortened. At one point in the future you might even not be able to play it anymore.

You can play board games still 50 years after their release, if they've been kept under good circumstances.

Not so long computer and video games.

Notice something ? Our attention span shortens ...

I see what you mean, the argument that we're not purchasing anything but "renting" it. They talked about that over at Bioware too. They even have one of their own moderators a little peeved about this. If they want to do this maybe they should adjust their prices to reflect that we are just renting the game and no longer can buy it.

I'm not so worried. It may be a hassle but a crack will do away with any fears I have of not being able to play it in the future. I wouldn't trust EA to find it in their hearts to release a patch 4 or 5 years down the line that gets rid of the copyprotection. They still haven't fixed Ultima 9. It took the online community to somewhat fix EA's broken product and it will be the online community that fixes it so that we can play this product when we're old and gray.

There are a lot of new gamers or "casual gamers" that have never had a long attention span when it comes to computer games because they don't play them as long as some of us "hardcore" gamers do. So I'm not so sure the whole industries attention span has lessened. I think it's more along the lines that there are just a lot more people buying these products than there used to be. In the 80's and 90's computer games were still considered "geeky" so there weren't as many people buying them. But now computers are "cool" (thanks inpart to the internet, myspace, instant messengers etc...) Now you don't have people demanding longer games or more depth, but flashier graphics and more action. Just some random thoughts on why the industry has, imo, been going downhill for awhile now. It must be going downhill if one of the games on my wish list is an Indie that doesn't look like it will ever be released (Grimiore).

I'm not happy with the ET phone home thing, but I'm still going to buy it when it comes out and and will crack it if I have any problems with their protection. If there is no problems then I won't have to and be happy that I don't have to look for that damn DVD anymore.

Well, Bioware adressed that problem in their thread:

Q: What happens in the future if I want to play MEPC and EA has shut off the servers?

A: If that should ever happen, BioWare would address this problem.


LMAO, funniest and saddest answer ever from Bioware.

I remember reading that and they talked about how after many years it still wouldn't be cost effective for EA to get rid of one of their older games on their servers because all of EA's games use them. It's probably true but I think they are trying too hard to have the kind of anti-piracy protection that MMOs have.

[Ionstormsucks]

The casual attitude towards piracy is just amazing. I post in one of the biggest finnish boards and there people post slogans like "P******ay - Its simply stupid to pay for games" (p******ay is the swedish torrent site).

They say that even though they have money their principles stop them from buying anything, because its freely available. Or that they save nature by copying only bits. Its not only accepted its recommended.

Well, the release scene has a tendency to romanticise what they are doing - "freedom of information" and all the usual yadda yadda. I guess parts of the filesharing scene have already deeply incorporated these ideas, after all you can read them in basically every .nfo file.

LMAO, funniest and saddest answer ever from Bioware.

I remember reading that and they talked about how after many years it still wouldn't be cost effective for EA to get rid of one of their older games on their servers because all of EA's games use them. It's probably true but I think they are trying too hard to have the kind of anti-piracy protection that MMOs have.
What's so funny about it? They simply have to release a crack for their copy protection should they ever decide to shut down the servers. So - what's the point?

[skavenhorde]

What's so funny about it? They simply have to release a crack for their copy protection should they ever decide to shut down the servers. So - what's the point?

The funny thing is that I'm still waiting for EA to fix Ultima 9. I may be wrong here but Bioware doesn't make those kinds of decisions anymore, it's EA's call and the last time I checked EA isn't known for their quality control or supporting their products after a certain point.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

I see what you mean, the argument that we're not purchasing anything but "renting" it. They talked about that over at Bioware too. They even have one of their own moderators a little peeved about this. If they want to do this maybe they should adjust their prices to reflect that we are just renting the game and no longer can buy it.

Well, not exactly. In a way yes, but what i originally meant was that we just don't care that much aout games anymore - and the heavy work involved, the creativity, the inspiration ...

We just dismiss it after a few years, because we can't play it anymore. Because the systems have grown far too complex to be emulated in the same way/manner like DOSBOX does it and can do it.

To express this in money, the 10.000 dollars of development in a game are degrading so fast ... Far too fart, in my eyes. Within 10 years, there's ZERO left of these 10.000 dollar development costs, because the games just can't be played anymore.

We currently live in a highly materialistic "ex & hopp" world, where you just throw things away like litter & rubbish after you think you can't use it anymore. It's like a one-way game. Or a self-destructing messaage: You read it once, then it self-destructs itself.

Games - contemporary games, that is - are similar. They can be played a few years, hen the OS changes completely (thanks to Microsoft), and then it's gone. You just have to throw it away, because you just can't play it anymore, the nerw OS has most probably become incompatible (once again thanks to Microsoft). And there's no way to easily emulate the OS, becaus it has just become far too complex.

Play once - then throw it away. Okay, a few times. Compared to the several decades of board games.

And the whole industry isn't innocent in this problem. the hardware- and software wheel spins too fast now.

Look at console games instead: They have a far longer life-span, because the console itself dioesn't change.
But then, there's a new console ... Remember how Sony left the emulation chip for PS2 games out ? Now the PC hardware and software wheel has come to the consoles as well ...


The whole industry lives by a far too short attention lifespan. Everything changes far too much and far too fast.

You just can't "invest" your money into games anymore, because they just degrade so fast. In contrary, money spent into board games just stays there, several decades, even !


So, in my opinion, the industry is part of the copy protecxtion problem itself. Because it negates / neglects th will of the customer to "invest" money into a game.
In principle, the industry has become a fast burger king or mc donals - like machine of games. Put the money in, the game gets out, after you eat it, you can throw it away.

There's no love in it !

Only cash cow.

[Holly Avenger]

LMAO, funniest and saddest answer ever from Bioware.

Indeed.

It makes the assumption that Bioware will still exist if/when the EA servers are taken down. Who wants to bet on that given EA's track record of consuming, digesting and then spitting out the bones of those it buys out?

[kalniel]

Best sports and driving games are only on the newest consoles. The prime genres for many pirates I know. Infact EA just recently ceased to make sports games for PC alltogether. I really meant why do more people buy the console version of a game that also exists on the PC.


EDIT: What I find interesting is that hardly anyone complains about the fact that you can only activate the game on three different computers.I'm looking forward to the increased number of computers I can play it on - most of my software is only licensed for use on one computer.

Indeed.

It makes the assumption that Bioware will still exist if/when the EA servers are taken down. Who wants to bet on that given EA's track record of consuming, digesting and then spitting out the bones of those it buys out?Didn't you read the stuff when when EA bought pandemic? They do things differently now - they're not the same Origin munching company anymore. A short while ago Bioware were the darlings of players everywhere - can't you trust them to do something like make a game accessible when they have said they will?

[zakhal]

I really meant why do more people buy the console version of a game that also exists on the PC.


Its too hard to pirate games on the newest consoles. On pc though its too easy. Thus the console sales are greatly boosted.

[Ionstormsucks]

The funny thing is that I'm still waiting for EA to fix Ultima 9. I may be wrong here but Bioware doesn't make those kinds of decisions anymore, it's EA's call and the last time I checked EA isn't known for their quality control or supporting their products after a certain point.

I dunno, but from my point of view that's two different things really. You're talking about supporting a product after a certain point, but this is about releasing a crack because you do not want to support a product anymore. The costs to do the later are minimal if you know how to do it, so I don't think it's the same thing.

Quality issues are a different thing really - they are always mixed in with the piracy debate, but not always rightfully. With all due respect, but how often do we buy games and rely on the word of the publisher or developer that they will patch the game, etc. without thinking twice. That's simply part of the deal - we have to trust them and, should they disappoint us, draw the consequences and simply don't buy their products anymore. Which is what you should - also if you don't like their copy protection systems, but simply saying they won't stick to what they are saying now sounds like a pretty weak excuse imo.

[Ionstormsucks]

I'm looking forward to the increased number of computers I can play it on - most of my software is only licensed for use on one computer.

The overwhelming majority of games so far could be installed on an unlimited amount of computers. Software in general is a different thing...

[Arhu]

Its too hard to pirate games on the newest consoles. On pc though its too easy.

I think it mostly has to do with the fact that consoles have more of a "entertainment only" image. Relatively cheap and you even get a Blueray player or whatnot.

Since this thread is about piracy, there was an interesting article on gamasutra in February: Casual Games and Piracy: The Truth (http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17350)

Granted, I wouldn't call Mass Effect a casual game, but the piracy mechanics might be similar. Assuming that to be true, copy protection increases sales somewhat (and may help to prevent 0-day piracy), but beyond that, extra sales saturate quickly. And in that light, I wonder how much piracy actually helps to promote games, something that usually demos are meant for.

[Ionstormsucks]

Since this thread is about piracy, there was an interesting article on gamasutra in February: Casual Games and Piracy: The Truth (http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17350)

The article was already mentioned last time we discussed piracy on these boards, and I totally agree that not every pirated copy equals one copy that isn't bought. But I would be careful, since the article is not necessarily representative.



Granted, I wouldn't call Mass Effect a casual game, but the piracy mechanics might be similar. Assuming that to be true, copy protection increases sales somewhat (and may help to prevent 0-day piracy), but beyond that, extra sales saturate quickly. And in that light, I wonder how much piracy actually helps to promote games, something that usually demos are meant for.
I wouldn't go down that route... I know of not one single respectable study which proves that piracy has such such a side-effect. If you know of one, I would be very interested in it (without irony, I would be really interested in it).

[zakhal]

I think it mostly has to do with the fact that consoles have more of a "entertainment only" image. Relatively cheap and you even get a Blueray player or whatnot.

To som extent perhaps but the real reason is that it also has a very effective copy protection. Everyone I know pirates most or all of their games - console or no console - except one who has ps3. There are no modchips for it yet and he would loose the online services that he likes very much, so he stays away from piracy.

And in that light, I wonder how much piracy actually helps to promote games, something that usually demos are meant for.

Usually though people prefer to save the money by acquiring as many pirated copies as possible. They will pirate all the games they can and possibly buy the one that has no effective crack yet (i.e multiplayer games). Thats how it has always been like 20 years as fas as I can remember. There are of course few exceptions but those just prove the point.

[Arhu]

The article was already mentioned last time we discussed piracy on these boards

Oops. It does seem to be "one of those topics" that pop up regularly, doesn't it? ;)

And no, I don't know of any serious studies. I only remember reading somewhere that some previously unknown rock bands got really popular because their music was shared and copied from tape to tape in the days of old. Ironically those bands were suing people nowadays for filesharing.. I don't have a source, unfortunately.

[Ionstormsucks]

Oops. It does seem to be "one of those topics" that pop up regularly, doesn't it? ;)

And no, I don't know of any serious studies. I only remember reading somewhere that some previously unknown rock bands got really popular because their music was shared and copied from tape to tape in the days of old. Ironically those bands were suing people nowadays for filesharing.. I don't have a source, unfortunately.

Too bad, I'm always on the hunt for new info on the topic... unfortunately studies are scarce - especially about software piracy (I mean independant ones, not the BSA crap).

I know about quite a few studies concerning the music market, and you are right... you can sometimes see such effects there. But we should not forget that the music market and the pc games market are not quite comparable. There are certainly similarities, but there also differences. Personally, I have my doubts that someone who has previously downloaded a pirated copy will later on go to the store and buy a legal copy.

[kalniel]

The overwhelming majority of games so far could be installed on an unlimited amount of computers. Software in general is a different thing...It seems to me an awful lot of games are only licensed for use on one computer as well. I think I first noticed it around about the time Morrowind came out, though it might have been the case before then and I just hadn't noticed.

And in that light, I wonder how much piracy actually helps to promote games, something that usually demos are meant for.
None in my opinion. If a pirate recommends a game to a friend they're going to recommend the pirate copy, not the original. If it does have any promotional effect it's in reducing demand for a competitor's product, because they're now paying yours for free instead of paying a competitor. That's not a very nice viewpoint to take, but it works well for Microsoft (the situation that is, not necessarily the viewpoint).

[Stanza]

How many RPGs over the years have actually released patches that disable copy protection? Especially in the case of RPGs, since they tend to have a much longer selling lifetime than most other genres?

The only one I can think of is Sacred.

Arguably, Morrowind had one with the very, very first beta patch, which disabled copy protection (though I'm not sure if it went so far as to no longer need a disk in the drive), but the first full patch re-enabled copy protection with lower settings that did no impact performance nearly so much.

What other RPGs have done this? I don't know of any other game in my collection that has a legitimate no-cd patch.

In the absence of evidence, I can only assume that this copy protection will never be disabled.

After all, doing nothing takes no effort. Releasing a no-cd patch, on the other hand, takes engineering and QA resources. If the game is far enough past its prime that EA no longer cares about sales, why would they be willing to expend the time and money for another patch?

[kalniel]

What other RPGs have done this? I don't know of any other game in my collection that has a legitimate no-cd patch.

In the absence of evidence, I can only assume that this copy protection will never be disabled.
Seeing as we're talking about Bioware.. .oh look! Bioware's last RPG disabled the CD check too - NWN. Cool :)

[Arhu]

None in my opinion. If a pirate recommends a game to a friend they're going to recommend the pirate copy, not the original. If it does have any promotional effect it's in reducing demand for a competitor's product, because they're now paying yours for free instead of paying a competitor.

Mm, maybe that's the difference between the music industry and computer games then: with music the artist or band is often more important in terms of popularity than their music, whereas developers are usually of secondary importance compared to their games.

In other words, while a band might get more popular due to piracy (read: more widespread coverage), developers don't get that benefit because they are mostly remembered by their games, not their faces.

[Squeek]

I know of not one single respectable study which proves that piracy has such such a side-effect [increasing sales].
It's a given that high status is good for sales. That's the point of product PR and advertising, to try to create that. So there's no need to do a study.

It's a crazy thought for just about anything else other than software, but giving it away isn't such a bad idea. It's all good except for the potential of it getting into the hands of someone who might otherwise buy it.

EDIT: Of course, that wouldn't do much for its fair market value.

[Ionstormsucks]

It seems to me an awful lot of games are only licensed for use on one computer as well. I think I first noticed it around about the time Morrowind came out, though it might have been the case before then and I just hadn't noticed.


I only encountered it once so far (online purchase of NWN2), but that's not my point anyway. My point is that everyone is saying that convenience is a big factor. And then everyone complains about the copy protection, but not about the fact that they can only install the game on three different computers. Just think about it... you install it on your desktop, your laptop, and maybe on a friend's computer to show him/her the game - and that's it... next year when you buy a new computer and are looking forward to play MEPC again you're in for a big suprise... how does that go together with convenience?


In other words, while a band might get more popular due to piracy (read: more widespread coverage), developers don't get that benefit because they are mostly remembered by their games, not their faces.
There are other differences you have to keep in mind. For a publisher it's very hard to evaluate why exactely a game failed - was it piracy? Was it just a bad game design? At the end of the day the publisher probably doesn't even care... a failure simply has huge financial consequences and that's all they are interested in.
That's a bit different in the the music industry. Artists here have other possibilities to earn money - concerts and merchandising for example. Who really suffers from piracy on the music market are the record companies, but not the artists (at least not to such a degree). It becomes more and more clear that the key to sell music is indeed convenience and a low price (which means online distribution), a fact that most record companies neglected for a very long time. What we're seeing today are the natural consequences of this neglect - record sales (especially online sales) are rising again, but there is not nearly as much money in the market anymore than 10 or 15 years ago, simply because of the low price of oline music tracks. So record companies have slowly began to react and engage in new business models like music flatrates or 360 degree contracts with new artists (means - they also organize concerts and the merchandising, but laso get a bit of money for it).
But overall I'd say that artists might draw some kind of long term profit from piracy, but not the record companies (at least not in most cases - there are exceptions).

I don't see that for the pc gaming market. The production values here are immense and developers depend much more on publishers than music artists on the record companies. No doubt - convenience is a factor, I always said that publishers and developers have to begin to embrace digital distribution and provide an additional value (something that Bioware in fact does - the first expansion to ME is obviously free), but they also must have the possibility to protect their products. And after all everyone has the possibility to reject such a copy protection by just not buying the game. If ME should fail because of low sales due to this copy protection then it's probably the first and last try to introduce such a drm.

It's a given that high status is good for sales. That's the point of product PR and advertising, to try to create that. So there's no need to do a study.

Unfortunately there is no proof that a high piracy rate equals a high status. Since you very often hear that argument that piracy has such a side-effect studies are necessary to evaluate if there is something to that theory. Such studies exist for the music industry for example - safe to say not all of them come to the same conclusion.

[kalniel]

I only encountered it once so far (online purchase of NWN2), but that's not my point anyway. My point is that everyone is saying that convenience is a big factor. And then everyone complains about the copy protection, but not about the fact that they can only install the game on three different computers. Just think about it... you install it on your desktop, your laptop, and maybe on a friend's computer to show him/her the game - and that's it... next year when you buy a new computer and are looking forward to play MEPC again you're in for a big suprise... how does that go together with convenience? Well I'm saying that's an awful lot more convenient that most other games that I've got which I'm only allowed to install on one computer. Three computers is not an inconvenience, its a convenience.

Of the top of my head, MEPC is better in that respect than Morrowind, Oblivion, Test Drive Unlimited, The Witcher, NWN2, Supreme Commander and who knows what else. As far as I know, all of the above have done OK, and there wasn't any great complaining about the inconvenience of only being licensed for a single computer.

[woges]

Well I'm saying that's an awful lot more convenient that most other games that I've got which I'm only allowed to install on one computer. Three computers is not an inconvenience, its a convenience.

Of the top of my head, MEPC is better in that respect than Morrowind, Oblivion, Test Drive Unlimited, The Witcher, NWN2, Supreme Commander and who knows what else.

It's 3 activations total not computers. As for no-cd cracks I'm pretty sure that altering DRM programs was made criminal in the act also.

[MaskedMan]

What other RPGs have done this? I don't know of any other game in my collection that has a legitimate no-cd patch.

Gothic 3 & Arx Fatalis.

Anyway, I tried being outraged by this but I just couldn't be bothered. I'll probably just wait a few weeks until there is a reliable no-cd available and get it then. There might be some problems getting hold of the "bringing down the sky"-extras, and I'm sure EA is already planning some bastard stuff for any patches, but seeing how this eliminates all piracy I'm sure it's worth it...

As I see it the ideal scenario would be if EA released a patch to remove this copy-protection in a few months time, when the net is overflowing with MEPC-torrents, to rope in the affronted internetless Bio-fanboys, and remove the fear of loosing the ability to play the game due to internett-colapse. I'm still waiting for a patch like this for BioShock, I might buy it if it should ever be released. Until then I can wait..

Personally I think that the publishers should try to hit the torrents more severely, either trough sabotage, or recording of IP-addresses, with following prosecution. It would probably only get a fraction of the pirates, but by creating a risk, I think you could weed out the less computer-savvy of the "casual pirates". Petty crimes (and piracy is a crime, whether it's as bad as stealing can be discussed, there is a reason why copyrights are a separate law) like shop-lifting and the like are relatively easy, but I doubt it is as generally widespread as "casual-piracy", simply because it isn't worth it compared to the risk of getting caught. The torrents should be fair game, I doubt that combating the would harm legitimate buyers more than draconian copyright systems on every single sold game.

By the way, does "3 separate installs" mean that you can install it and play it at three different computers simultaneously?

[zakhal]

Personally I think that the publishers should try to hit the torrents more severely, either trough sabotage, or recording of IP-addresses, with following prosecution.

Actually there is some top-organisation that does that. They distribute/download copyrighted games in all kinds of p2p networks and record the ips of filesharers. Then they use the ip address to contact the service provider to persue them to close down the internet connection or somthing.

I have heard of only one person been caught so I guess its not very efficient. Internet connection providers are making money and they are not interested of banning their customers or taking any responsibility of this. Also there are ways to hide your ip or othervice avoid these pirate-hunters.

[Ionstormsucks]

Well I'm saying that's an awful lot more convenient that most other games that I've got which I'm only allowed to install on one computer. Three computers is not an inconvenience, its a convenience.

Of the top of my head, MEPC is better in that respect than Morrowind, Oblivion, Test Drive Unlimited, The Witcher, NWN2, Supreme Commander and who knows what else. As far as I know, all of the above have done OK, and there wasn't any great complaining about the inconvenience of only being licensed for a single computer.

I cannot speak for the rest of the games, but my DVD copy of NWN2 is not limited to 1 computer. I'm not sure if we're talking about the same thing... I'm not talking about software being licensed for one person, I'm talking about a hardware dependent activation here. I seriously doubt that the majority of games out there has such a strict activation policy... I might be wrong, since I'm more the MMO type I haven't bought all too many offline games - maybe some of the others can shed some light on the topic?

[kalniel]

I cannot speak for the rest of the games, but my DVD copy of NWN2 is not limited to 1 computer.
Read your license for NWN2 again.

[Squeek]

Unfortunately there is no proof that a high piracy rate equals a high status.I suppose not, but who needs proof of that? Assuming a product is any good, why wouldn't it be an advantage to have more people aware of it? That's why products are advertised, to make more people aware of them.

[Arhu]

If anyone is interested in reading some more drama, take a gander at this sensationalist blog entry: Bioware and EA: The Dumbass Effect (http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=1645) (includes web comic)

[skavenhorde]

If you guys want an interesting read on the effects of piracy on the developers please read this from The Rampant Coyote: http://www.rampantgames.com/blog/2006/09/pirate-story.html

Even he admits that the publishers go too far with their protection but no protection at all is just stupid. In all the talking a lot of people miss the point in that the devs are real people with real jobs just trying to make a a fun game for us to enjoy. I'm not so sure about the publishers, the majority of them just look like they want to make as much money as possible and go onto the "next gen" game, but that is a generalization, not all do that.

After reading a real life story of how piracy affects the industry, I'm willing to put up with these kinds of security measures. After all I wasn't the one that had to work extremely hard to make the game. I just had to buy it.

The only really effective means of countering piracy would be to take down these p2p sites. Stop making it so easy for The Average Joe Blow to steal these products. No amount of copyprotection will ever be as effective as that.

[Ionstormsucks]

Read your license for NWN2 again.

There is a huge difference between being able to install it and use it on a single machine and a limited hardware dependent activation. It's simply not the same. As long as I have NWN2 only installed on a single machine that I own I do not violate the Eula... I can uninstall it and reinstall it on another one of my computers without violating the Eula. Now, from a legal point of view even this practice is rather dubious - and if I may say so, impossible to reinforce... after all, of how many cases do you know where a gamer was sued because he had a game running on his desktop AND his laptop. I don't know of a single one, and I've read a lot about software piracy.

Activation is different... I'm pretty sure that ME will still be licensed for only one person, but this time you won't be able to uninstall and reinstall your game an unlimited amount of times on different computers. After you have done it three times, you won't be able to run the game anymore. So the "new freedom" that you now enjoy is no freedom at all. Practically you could ALWAYS install games on more than one computer, because although it's against most Eulas, no one would sue you for it.

Even he admits that the publishers go too far with their protection but no protection at all is just stupid. In all the talking a lot of people miss the point in that the devs are real people with real jobs just trying to make a a fun game for us to enjoy. I'm not so sure about the publishers, the majority of them just look like they want to make as much money as possible and go onto the "next gen" game, but that is a generalization, not all do that.

First of all - publishers too, are real people. There are people involved in this process who have not the slightest bit to do with gameplay or copyright decisions, but who are still involved in the "game-making" process - take for example secretaries, etc. Honestly, I absolutely dislike this kind of black/white dichotomy.

Now to the article. It's hard to say what the author really means with "harsh DRM measures" - what he mentions is measures "that effectively cripple a customer's machine or their ability to enjoy the media on other devices that THEY OWN or control", and here I totally agree with him - see the paragraph above (where I answer to Kalniel). But We don't know what the author thinks about an online authentication... because he does not mention it.

Moreover, and that's why I consider the article as rather questionable, is that what we get here is merely the author's opinion which is based on his own assumptions, but not on facts, since the author displays quite some ignorance when it comes to the topic of software piracy. He shows his whole naivety in the end when he tries to make the reader away of the negative consequences of software piracy. We know from studies (Alain D'Astous et al to name just one study, but there are many more that come to this conclusion), that anti-piracy arguments (and campaigns using these arguments) are widely ineffective.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

I think it was Star Wars Battlefront, which says in its license, that the INSTALLED version of the game is the ONLY allowed backup of the *whole* game ...

Now this is something I call stupid. When I de-install it, I'm not allowed to make a backup copy anymore ? Or what ?

[fatBastard()]

I'm still waiting for a patch like this for BioShock, I might buy it if it should ever be released. Until then I can wait..

I still don't understand the importance of such a patch being an officially released patch. If you bought the game then why should you care whether it is an official or unofficial bit of software that takes care of your perceived problem?

[Alrik Fassbauer]

If it's official, then you can't be sued for using it.

It's as simple as that.

[Remus]

Can i buy the game, then patched it no activation crack without getting my ass sued?

[fatBastard()]

If it's official, then you can't be sued for using it.

It's as simple as that.

And do you honestly believe you would get sued for using an unofficial patch for a game you purchased? It doesn't strike you as a wee bit paranoid? (I'm not trying to belittle you. I'm just curious as to why such a minor issue would even cause you to blink let alone steer clear of a game without an official patch)

[Ionstormsucks]

I think it was Star Wars Battlefront, which says in its license, that the INSTALLED version of the game is the ONLY allowed backup of the *whole* game ...

Now this is something I call stupid. When I de-install it, I'm not allowed to make a backup copy anymore ? Or what ?

Hard to say, but I wouldn't worry too much about Eulas anyway. Publishers tend to write a lot of stuff in there - not all of it has a legal basis. German law for example values the "backup" copy very high - even to a degree that you can use programs (to make a backup copy of your legally purchased software) that are otherwise forbidden.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

And do you honestly believe you would get sued for using an unofficial patch for a game you purchased? It doesn't strike you as a wee bit paranoid? (I'm not trying to belittle you. I'm just curious as to why such a minor issue would even cause you to blink let alone steer clear of a game without an official patch)

I'm reading really weird storiers about U.S. companies sueing ... Especially the RIAA ...
(Okay, that's no company in an economical sense ...)

[Squeek]

I've never heard of an individual getting in trouble for using a cracked exe (and doubt I ever will, honestly). People do go to jail for pirating software, though. They're the ones doing it on a grand scale.

The first civil suits I ever heard of were filed against the big Napster uploaders. Downloaders got a free ride. BitTorrent is a much more clever iteration of the same concept, so...

Corporations are something else entirely. No one gives them a free ride at all.

[zakhal]

Corporations are something else entirely. No one gives them a free ride at all.

Funnily that even that even those that *enforce the copy protection* get caught for using pirated software. It happened som month ago but Im not sure what firm it was but it was a big one (RIIA?) and at first they tried to hide the incident. After investigations they found up to somthing like 50% of the firms software to be pirated. Its a messy situation all around.

[Turjan]

Funnily that even that even those that *enforce the copy protection* get caught for using pirated software. It happened som month ago but Im not sure what firm it was but it was a big one (RIIA?) and at first they tried to hide the incident. After investigations they found up to somthing like 50% of the firms software to be pirated. Its a messy situation all around.
It was Sony, in France. Someone at a local Sony office called a software company for support, and when the support guy arrived, he noticed that all serial numbers they used were pirated. The software company sued.

[PatrickWeekes]

http://masseffect.bioware.com/forums/viewtopic.html?topic=629059&forum=125&sp=0#5774350

Read. I can't answer questions or talk about it in any other terms, so just read.

[Gorath]

Much better! Thanks for the link, Patrick! :)

[Squeek]

This change in policy could be seen as a win for fans and a loss for Bioware, but that would be too simple. This whole episode is regrettable.

Someone at Bioware got the idea that it could give its piracy problem to its customers and that the facts supported that kind of approach. But it ignored the crucial fact that customers deserve to be well treated and given the benefit of the doubt, no matter what.

A better idea would have been to enhance everyone's enjoyment of the game in a way that could offer pirates something more than what they can get for free in exchange for their patronage.

If you're like me, that doesn't really seem right, does it? It’s like rewarding bad ethics. Still, it's an approach that would actually work. Compare it to Bioware's idea that didn’t. As RPG fans, we all know that chests full of treasure ought to be locked. But when the locks stop working, it’s time to think in terms of another solution.

Developers and fans need to stay on the same side, and pirates need to be welcomed back into the fold.

[woges]

Stanley Woo posted:

"To clarify once again:

Uninstalling and reinstalling on the same PC will not use up additional activations. It is only when there is a significant change to the hardware profile that it will count as a subsequent activation.

The extent to which the same PC may be altered before requiring another activation has not yet been disclosed."

That is... better, and I think a good thing to know for some.

[skavenhorde]

Developers and fans need to stay on the same side, and pirates need to be welcomed back into the fold.

The occasional pirate who just downloads games because it is more convient than buying it needs to be welcomed back, but I'm not so sure about the people who download everything no matter what just because they think it is their right to do so because it isn't "stealing". God I love how some pirates try to justify their actions by saying it's just a copyright and isn't stealing.

Onto the battle against piracy. The music industry is taking a different approach than the pc market as explained here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/28/piracy.digitalmedia

From what I understand from this article, Radiohead offered their music for free before their CD was released for whatever the people wanted to pay for it, 2.90 pounds it turns out. Then when their CD was released it went to No.1 in sales. Radiohead had to leave their old label to try out this experiment because the powers that be didn't want anything to do with this.

I'm not so sure this could work for PC games. You could download a few of Radioheads songs and listen to them to see if you like them, then go buy the CD. But if you gave away the whole game like MEPC what would be the incentive to get the average gamer to go buy what he already downloaded. I think if the publishers did what Stardock is doing by offering real incentives to buy the game by offering more patches and additional content, then this might work.

Here is something out of the twilight zone,
http://gizmodo.com/380418/the-pirate-bay-to-turn-tables-sue-international-music-industry

The pirate bay was sued by International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (never heard of them before, I guess they still use phongraphs :biggrin:) They sued pirate bay to block access to their site but it looks like the courts are going to side with TPB. So now PB is going to sue IFPI for damages and use the money to start a grant for aspiring artists. So I guess they think they are taking from the rich and giving to the poor. The 21st century Robin Hood :lol: and all the pirates who download their stuff are their merry men. Next thing you know they'll all be wearing tights and singing "Men in Tights."

As for MEPC I'm glad EA changed their minds about the ET phone home deal. Now I don't have to look for a crack, but are they still going to have it so you don't need a DVD in the drive?

[Ionstormsucks]

I'm not so sure this could work for PC games. You could download a few of Radioheads songs and listen to them to see if you like them, then go buy the CD. But if you gave away the whole game like MEPC what would be the incentive to get the average gamer to go buy what he already downloaded. I think if the publishers did what Stardock is doing by offering real incentives to buy the game by offering more patches and additional content, then this might work.

And with, "more patches and additinal content," you mean the patches and content that you have to download via an open internet connection - I take it that's the same internet connection which is impossible to use for an online authentication... see the hypocrisy? Btw, Bioware is offering the first expansion to MEPC for free... unfortunately fans didn't seem to realize that in the hysterical state.

Honestly, there are differences between the music industry and the pc games industry and I don't think you can compare them on every level. Take the example of Radiohead - these guys are a fairly well known group, they could without any doubt simply finance themselves, they could be totally independent if they wished to do it... or just found their own label. Even if if they earned absolutely NO money with their records, they could make enough money with merchandising and concerts. Established artists have absolutely no problem with piracy because they'll make their fair share of money anyway.

The average game developer does not have these possibilities. NO publisher or game developer can give away a brand new product for free. The costs to produce a game are much higher than the costs to produce a music album.

This change in policy could be seen as a win for fans and a loss for Bioware, but that would be too simple.
That's correct, because it is also a win for the FXP and filesharing scene. The release scene will probably be a bit pissed that they don't get a really new copy protection to crack, but that's about it.

Don't get me wrong - I value customer rights, but I despise one-sided views. People these days talk alot about working together with the fans and customers, but piracy is a problem that does not primarily concern fans and customers - it concerns the people that are neither fans nor customers. The reasons why people pirate games are manyfold - the formular "people pirate because they can" is too simple... we know that from numerous studies. Socialization and cultural influences play a role, as well as group pressure and last but not least financial aspects (among many other things). In my personal opinion it is impossible for the games industry to find models that address all these problems.

Please don't forget that the faces of piracy are manyfold, there is not just the elite release scene, the not so elite FXP scene, and end-user-piracy which usually is a synonym for p2p nowadays... piracy has more ugly sides, like street corner sales for example. There are people who make hard cash with pirated games, just think about certain Asian and Eastern European countries. These guys are not fans, they don't care about the game - they care about money... and no additional content will keep them from seeling the stuff.

When it comes to the article about the heroic aspirations of The PirateBay, I can only quote the internet:


You know, I think the media really fucked up when they called it “software piracy”. Everyone WANTS to be a pirate. If they’d called it “software faggotry” everyone would still buy all their shit.

[Squeek]

That's correct, because it is also a win for the FXP and filesharing scene...Don't get me wrong - I value customer rights, but I despise one-sided views...Please don't forget that the faces of piracy are manyfold...(please excuse the editing)

If you're suggesting that what's important to pirates is important too, then I have to disagree. Pirates are exceptions in all of this. They don't have equal status. They're not deserving of anything. They simply need to be understood, and then only to a point that's necessary.

The Internet's a tool to be used. Pirates use it to enable their piracy, and developers have been trying to use it as a means to try to defeat it, and I don't see any hypocrisy there.

But I do see what I think is a better approach and one that lends itself to RPG. Developers could take advantage of the Internet by offering variety as additional value that would be available only to legitimate customers (via server access).

Variety is the key. RPGs don't need to be made in a single version. Cleverly designed additional content, without labels or readme information, would just be too much to evaluate and categorize with any amount of confidence. So no pirated version would ever have quite the same perceived value.

Downloads would be there for customers to access whenever they wanted. The Internet wouldn't be positioned between them and the game. Pirates would still be able to enjoy their pirated versions, knowing that something better was available to them if they decided to buy it.

PS. Piracy where games are physically duplicated and distributed is something else altogether. That's more of a matter for law enforcement than anything else.

[Gorath]

I think the only people who count if you want to sell a game, or make a game to be sold later, are exactly the members of your target audience. This is everybody who you think could realistically be convinced to purchase your game.
Take the anti-CP faction's favourite example: Stardock. Their boss explained why their windows customization suite mostly consists of big, weird skins which look strange to a power user. The answer: Because the people willing to pay for their product want it that way. Experience told them the people who suggest slick designs have good ideas but are not willing to spend money. Thus they are not relevant.

So some of the pirates are relevant: those who you think you can convert to paying customers.

[Hedek]

http://masseffect.bioware.com/forums/viewtopic.html?topic=629059&forum=125&sp=0#5774350

Read. I can't answer questions or talk about it in any other terms, so just read.

PatrickWeekes if you've got the time could you please read this
http://masseffect.bioware.com/forums/viewtopic.html?topic=629036&forum=125
and tell me whether you think, from a developer point of view, whether buying secuROM from Sony is a logical way to spend game developers' tight budgets?

[Squeek]

So some of the pirates are relevant: those who you think you can convert to paying customers.I don't know how to respond to disagreement followed by an expression of, essentially, a very similar point of view.

Pirates certainly are potential customers, and I've expressed that opinion in detail, but that doesn't mean we can't refer to their piracy. Their point of view as potential customers is valuable, but their point of view as pirates isn't.

[Ionstormsucks]

The Internet's a tool to be used. Pirates use it to enable their piracy, and developers have been trying to use it as a means to try to defeat it, and I don't see any hypocrisy there.

Neither do I (and I never said that there is any - the hypocrisiy is on the side of the people who have an open internet connection 24/7, but complain on the bioware boards that they need to contact to a server every 10 days), but unfortunately a lot of gamers piss their pants if they hear that they have to connect to a game server once in while. For the overwhelming majority of them it would probably neither be a problem, nor an inconvenience. Everyone wants high quality games, everyone wants innovative games, and that publishers and developers take a risk, etc., but in an environment where piracy flourishes most publishers simply won't do that.


But I do see ... knowing that something better was available to them if they decided to buy it.

I always said that additional content is a good thing, the question is how far you can go. If I see the outcry whenever someone mentions "episodic content" I'd think that you cannot take this concept all too far.


PS. Piracy where games are physically duplicated and distributed is something else altogether. That's more of a matter for law enforcement than anything else.
No, it's exactely the same, well not exactely, but more or less. In most European countries the distribution of illegal copies is a criminal act, it does absolutely NOT matter if you make a profit or not. Often the release scene considers itself morally superior since they don't make any money, but let's face it - in the end they are still damaging the industry.

The boundaries between end-user-piracy and professional counterfeit are blurry nowadays. It's pretty safe to assume that most counterfeiters and street merchants can neither crack a copy protection nor program a keygen... where do you think they get this stuff from?

For the industry it's totally unimportant who makes them lose money - they don't care if it's the filesharing user or the street merchant. But it schould be fairly clear that concepts like "additional content" will not keep counterfeiters from pirating the game, because they are not interested in the product itself.

Hey, I'm not saying that piracy is the source of all evil, from a customer point of view piracy might even have advantages, but I see the difficulties involved. Plus, I know the alternatives... because if you really think that a harsh copy protection is a worst case scenario then you should have a look at what alternative measures the industry and governments are thinking about.

[Turjan]

... the hypocrisiy is on the side of the people who have an open internet connection 24/7, but complain on the bioware boards that they need to contact to a server every 10 days), but unfortunately a lot of gamers piss their pants if they hear that they have to connect to a game server once in while. For the overwhelming majority of them it would probably neither be a problem, nor an inconvenience.
I guess your analysis misses the problem. I was bitching about this scheme, and I have a 24/7 internet connection. Nevertheless, I think I have a very good reason for this bitching. I don't like games with a limited lifetime. When I buy a game, I want to be able to take it 10 years from now and, after the then necessary fiddling with the hardware, be able to play it. If EA had said, OK folks, in one year from now, we will release a patch to get rid of that obnoxious phoning, and in three years from now, we will release a patch that removes the activation process altogether, I would be fine. But they won't do that. And that's what I don't like about it.

OK, they dropped the "always online" requirement. If they now tell us they will release that patch for the activation requirement one day, I'm happy. I'm OK with it for the moment, but not for eternity.

[Gorath]

I don't know how to respond to disagreement followed by an expression of, essentially, a very similar point of view.

Pirates certainly are potential customers, and I've expressed that opinion in detail, but that doesn't mean we can't refer to their piracy. Their point of view as potential customers is valuable, but their point of view as pirates isn't.

I think the gap between our positions might be a bit subtle. ;)
Let me tackle it from another perspective:
Pirates´ (:= A) opinions do not matter at all.
Potential customers´ (:= B) opinions do matter.
A subset of the pirates belongs to the set of potential customers because your research has told you they might purchase your game. This intersection (:= C) between A and B shall be treated as members of B. (An example could be gamers who buy original if the standard ISO + fixed .exe thing doesn´t work within a few days after release.)

IMHO subset C is pretty small. Maybe something between 1 and 10% of A.

Or to summarize it more casually:
Define your target audience, listen to them and make the best product for them. The rest can STFU.

[Ionstormsucks]

I guess your analysis misses the problem. I was bitching about this scheme, and I have a 24/7 internet connection. Nevertheless, I think I have a very good reason for this bitching. I don't like games with a limited lifetime. When I buy a game, I want to be able to take it 10 years from now and, after the then necessary fiddling with the hardware, be able to play it. If EA had said, OK folks, in one year from now, we will release a patch to get rid of that obnoxious phoning, and in three years from now, we will release a patch that removes the activation process altogether, I would be fine. But they won't do that. And that's what I don't like about it.

OK, they dropped the "always online" requirement. If they now tell us they will release that patch for the activation requirement one day, I'm happy. I'm OK with it for the moment, but not for eternity.

Fair enough, but don't you think that the limited activation might turn out to be a much bigger problem in terms of lifetime? I seriously doubt there will be many people around in ten years who won't have used up their 3 activations.

Basically I agree with you, customers should of course have the possibility to play a game they bought as long as they meet the necessary requirements. And yes, I think it's an huge mistake on EA's part not to announce that after a certain period of time they will intruduce a patch that adresses the issue.

On the other hand it also should be fairly clear, that in a few years (even months) ME's copy protection will not POSE a problem to anyone anymore. Of course it cannot be a solution to expect from people to work with cracks, but... ya... well... it's just a fact.

[skavenhorde]

Honestly, there are differences between the music industry and the pc games industry and I don't think you can compare them on every level. Take the example of Radiohead - these guys are a fairly well known group, they could without any doubt simply finance themselves, they could be totally independent if they wished to do it... or just found their own label. Even if if they earned absolutely NO money with their records, they could make enough money with merchandising and concerts. Established artists have absolutely no problem with piracy because they'll make their fair share of money anyway.

The average game developer does not have these possibilities. NO publisher or game developer can give away a brand new product for free. The costs to produce a game are much higher than the costs to produce a music album.

Exactly. That's why I said I didn't think it would work. Tons of hours go into one game, one product, with little to no chance of making any additional money off of things like you said concerts, shirts whatever. I don't think there will be a huge rock Mass Effect Concert coming soon :biggrin: So the devs and publishers have to get people to buy that one product or all that time and money went to waste.

I however don't think it was hypocritical of people to be a little peeved about having to dial in every 5 days even though they have a internet connection. With Stardock you dial in when you want to, not because you're forced to. So we come back to some way of shutting down p2p sites. Copyprotection isn't ever going to work. Stop making it so easy for the people to download whatever the heck they feel like. Make it so if they want to pay nothing for something then they have to actually get off their butts get down to a store and steal it. We'll see a dramatic drop in piracy after that.

China just showed us it is possible to somewhat control the internet when they blocked every little news bit covering the olympic protests. I'm not for blocking news and information but I sure am hell not against shutting down these sites that blatently allow people to steal these products or at the very least give them hefty fines for allowing people to steal so easily.

[Ionstormsucks]

I however don't think it was hypocritical of people to be a little peeved about having to dial in every 5 days even though they have a internet connection. With Stardock you dial in when you want to, not because you're forced to.

It was every 10 days... but let's leave it at that. I guess this particular copyprotection is something you either like or dislike. People just should be aware that such a copy protection simply has its advantages.


So we come back to some way of shutting down p2p sites. Copyprotection isn't ever going to work.

That entirely depends on the copy protection. I absolutely agree that traditional copy protection methods will probably never offer a full protection. Although, right now they are pretty much a necessity. That really has to do with the law in different countries... In Germany for example it is perfectly legal to make so called private copies of a game and give these copies to friends UNLESS you have to circumvent a copy protection to duplicate a game.


China just showed us it is possible to somewhat control the internet when they blocked every little news bit covering the olympic protests. I'm not for blocking news and information but I sure am hell not against shutting down these sites that blatently allow people to steal these products or at the very least give them hefty fines for allowing people to steal so easily.
I guess that blocking certain internet sites, even if they contain illegal content is out of the question. In most western European countries that's simply unthinkable and against the law - and rightfully so. Of course there is the possibility to shut them down, but let's face it - that's absolutely impossible. Take The PirateBay for example, there were several attempts to shut down the site... without much success really. And TPB is one of the biggest sites on the web. There are countless small websites out there and whenever you close one, two others will pop up somewhere else.

I think that we're in need of different business models, publishers have to find the courage and try out new stuff. A recurring online authentication, is, at least from my point of view, a step in the right direction. One can certainly discuss how long you have to keep such a copy protection alive until you release a patch that gets rid of it. Things like limited activations are an absolute no go - I think a lot of people did not realize yet how bad that actually is... they will. Give them 5 years.
Publishers could give out old games for free - you buy a new game and if you register it online you'll can choose from a collection of older games and download one for free, stuff like that. These are really just examples... other things are certainly possible.

[zakhal]

Big torrentsite in US just got hit by a 111 million lawsuit. :) Hopefully the goverments of other nations will stop protecting these pirates so they can all be hunted down.

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/05/torrentspy-ding.html

They are not only helping to distribute illegal software they are also making money with it. I.E the swedish torrent site made 4 million last year.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

In the new issue (coming out tomorrow or the day after tomorrow) of the German magazine called c't there's a longish report/article about trojans, spam etc. .

The last paragraph reported quite a disturbing scene: German ISPs did a meeting with about 20 Russian ISPs.

"We would like to talk about the Spam problem", one of the Germans said.

"Why this ?" was the answer, "Spam, that's our business !"

Disturbing, because it seems to be true, according to the report.

The report noted that some of these activities seem to come from the RBN : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Business_Network