The source article Linky\"With Ubisoft's fantastically awful new DRM you must be online and logged in to their servers to play the games you buy. Not only was this DRM broken the very first day it was released, but now their authentication servers have failed so absolutely that no-one who legally bought their games can play them. 'At around 8am GMT, people began to complain in the Assassin's Creed 2 forum that they couldn't access the Ubisoft servers and were unable to play their games.' One can only hope that this utter failure will help to stem the tide of bad DRM.\"
Even if pirates stopped completely, this type of restriction would still happen because of the used game market. Companies would be working on ways to stop gamers from reselling what they've bought.Much as I think that level of DRM is insane, the fact remains that people would stop pirating shit companies wouldn't have to keep finding ways to stop them. You are not entirely to free high quality software. Pirates are not the goods guys.
Also:Echoing the controversial measures announced by Ubisoft last month, Sony has revealed that users of SOCOM: US Navy SEALs Fireteam Bravo 3 will need to register their game online before they are able to access the multiplayer component of the title.
UMD copies will use a redeemable code while the digital version will authenticate automatically in the background.
Furthermore, in a nod to recent plans implemented by EA, anyone buying a pre-owned copy of the game will be forced to cough up $20 to obtain a code to play online.
Take-Two To Battle Used Games MarketWithout some sort of change happening, Braben thinks the industry will be forced to go completely online, thereby killing off single-player games.
the company admitted that they are developing strategies similar to the Cerberus Network that will leverage DLC to deter secondhand buyers.
...
\"I think it's much more interesting to focus on things like downloadable content, but that said, anything's possible and we're not ruling anything out,\" the spokesman indicated.
Yet it only hurts the people who bought the game legally, spawning more pirates.Much as I think that level of DRM is insane, the fact remains that people would stop pirating shit companies wouldn't have to keep finding ways to stop them. You are not entirely to free high quality software. Pirates are not the goods guys.
Yes. This.The case of DRM happy Industry people and Pirates isn't a case of Good Vs. Evil, because nether side is innocent. One is looking to screw the companies and one it looking to screw the consumers. You shouldn't be rooting for ether side to win.
Sadly, these new DRM actually encourage MORE pirates since the pirated version are playable WITHOUT all these stupid DRM issuesThe case of DRM happy Industry people and Pirates isn't a case of Good Vs. Evil, because nether side is innocent. One is looking to screw the companies and one it looking to screw the consumers. You shouldn't be rooting for ether side to win.
I have been saying this forever.Sadly, these new DRM actually encourage MORE pirates since the pirated version are playable WITHOUT all these stupid DRM issues
There's an blog entry by an indie game developer who talks about this particular issue:News flash Ubisoft. Most people that pirate do it because they don't feel like putting down the money on the game. That means, even if they DIDN'T pirate it, they would most likely not buy it anyways, thus making the sale irrelevant. Yes, you may have the fencer that may sway to one side or the other at some point, but what is going to push him to your side? I can tell you one thing, it WON'T be draconian DRM.
I don't actually have statistics on hand regarding the number of sales of console games vs PC games, so I don't know if his point is valid.6. Suppose, for the sake of argument, they did develop pirate-proof DRM on the PC. Lots of people seem to assume that, when people can't pirate the game, they just won't buy it. Hogwash. People LOVE games. If they have to pay money to get games, they will. Just look at the XBox, Wii, and PS3. It's possible to pirate games there, but it is not easy. Thus, people pay tons of cash for them. It's easy to talk big about how you will never pay money for games with restrictive DRM, but everyone has a price. If games as sexy as Diablo 3 ever start coming with the mean DRM, a lot of people are going to sigh, grit their teeth, and accept it.
There's an blog entry by an indie game developer who talks about this particular issue:News flash Ubisoft. Most people that pirate do it because they don't feel like putting down the money on the game. That means, even if they DIDN'T pirate it, they would most likely not buy it anyways, thus making the sale irrelevant. Yes, you may have the fencer that may sway to one side or the other at some point, but what is going to push him to your side? I can tell you one thing, it WON'T be draconian DRM.
http://jeff-vogel.blogspot.com/2010/03/more-thoughts-on-anti-pirate-measures.html
I'm not sure I agree with all of it, but I generally think it's worth the read. The part specifically relevant is:
I don't actually have statistics on hand regarding the number of sales of console games vs PC games, so I don't know if his point is valid.6. Suppose, for the sake of argument, they did develop pirate-proof DRM on the PC. Lots of people seem to assume that, when people can't pirate the game, they just won't buy it. Hogwash. People LOVE games. If they have to pay money to get games, they will. Just look at the XBox, Wii, and PS3. It's possible to pirate games there, but it is not easy. Thus, people pay tons of cash for them. It's easy to talk big about how you will never pay money for games with restrictive DRM, but everyone has a price. If games as sexy as Diablo 3 ever start coming with the mean DRM, a lot of people are going to sigh, grit their teeth, and accept it.
You're assuming that it's easy to know that point, and that games aren't already priced over that. Valve has already shown that regular discounts (Steam sales are up to two a week, at least) don't negatively impact non-discounted sales, and actually increase them (including retail sales as well, oddly enough), and Microsoft is testing sales on XBLA and Games on Demand for Windows, but Nintendo still has yet to bring back the Player's Choice line of titles. Nintendo refusing to discount games doesn't necessarily mean they've made the choice that will make them the most money, only that they think will make them the most money long-term. In fact, I'm pretty sure it can't be doubted that Nintendo knows that they'll make more profits off of games put on the Player's Choice list, they're just afraid that if titles predictably drop over time, that they'll lose launch sales to frugal gamers waiting for that drop, and that drop in launch sales will eventually result in a lost in Player's Choice sales as well. It's a long term strategy, but no one knows for certain if it's the right strategy. Personally, I think it's more important to win customers good will, and to put out the Player's Choice titles, than it is to make them resentful over being able to afford fewer games.This isn't about what every gamer does. It is about what policies will result in the most money earned for the company. Which it is entirely the company's perogative to do. The price of a game should be as high as you can before sales drop off so significantly that overall profit goes down.
Honestly, I just do not buy that. The amount of damage that reselling individual games does to the market is infintismal (sp?) compared to what pirating can do. Developing a DRM like this does cost money and I don't think it would be worth the effort just to stop resales of the game.
I prefer Stardock's take on it: http://pc.ign.com/articles/906/906495p1.html and http://draginol.joeuser.com/article/303512/Piracy_PC_GamingThere's an blog entry by an indie game developer who talks about this particular issue:
http://jeff-vogel.blogspot.com/2010/...-measures.html
PS3 games can't be pirated for a bunch of reasons... and yet where are those sales compared to the 360 version of multiplat games?! Even if you account for console units sold the PS3 is still behind.. Suppose, for the sake of argument, they did develop pirate-proof DRM on the PC. Lots of people seem to assume that, when people can't pirate the game, they just won't buy it. Hogwash. People LOVE games. If they have to pay money to get games, they will. Just look at the XBox, Wii, and PS3. It's possible to pirate games there, but it is not easy. Thus, people pay tons of cash for them. It's easy to talk big about how you will never pay money for games with restrictive DRM, but everyone has a price. If games as sexy as Diablo 3 ever start coming with the mean DRM, a lot of people are going to sigh, grit their teeth, and accept it.