DRM: Seriously?

[Jiarn]

Is it really that "horrid/controversial" of a DRM to require online connection to be part of it's anti-piracy for the duration of the DRM?

How many people actually do not have a "constant" connection? I'm curious.

 

[figmentPez]

You're talking about Ubisoft's constant connection DRM used in PC games like Assassin's Creed 2, Settlers 7 and Splinter Cell Conviction? Games where, in some cases, legit purchasers couldn't play the game for more than a month after the games' release because Ubisoft couldn't get their crap together? Games where if your internet connection hiccups (and mine does, noticably, at least several times a week) you get dumped back to the menu screen and lose all your progress since your last save?

<SARCASM>No, I can't imagine why anyone would find that contraversial, at all.</SARCASM>

Yes, I have a broadband "always on" internet connection, but Comcast (my only choice besides satellite) has lousy service and it's liable to flake out for a few minutes or hours for no reason. I'm fine with games requiring online activation, like Steam. I even put up with Gametap for a while, which doesn't offer any sort of offline mode. However, it's complete bullshit to require a single player game to require a constant online connection just to play the game and I, for one, won't put up with it.

 

[Cog]

How long is Ubisoft going to keep the servers that make these games work?

 

[David]

I believe it's a matter of principle. If I pay full retail price for a single-player game, I expect to be able to play that game whenever I damn well please, regardless of my internet connection. I don't want software that will accuse me of pirating it if I feel like playing it when the cable company is working on the wires or will boot me off if there's a connection issue for a few minutes (as is prone to happening in my area)

Doesn't mean I'm going to pirate it. Just means I'm not going to play it at all.

 

[klew]

In my apartment, I have a mostly consistent connection, minus the intermittent drops. However, I also go on 3-7 day work cruises up to twice a month where I have no internet and lots of downtime, where I wouldn't be able to play these games. I suspect frequent travelers who don't end up in places with internet (or whose company won't pay for hotel internet) wouldn't like this type of DRM.

There are still probably plenty of people who still use dial-up. Is dial-up not fast enough for authentication?

 

[Ravenpoe]

How many people actually do not have a "constant" connection? I'm curious.

You may be surprised to learn that there are lots of people different from you.

 

[Jiarn]

Didn't mean "different from me" and there's no reason for it to get personal. I just find it interesting that there are those without solid connections these days.

 

[Ravenpoe]

Didn't mean "different from me" and there's no reason for it to get personal. I just find it interesting that there are those without solid connections these days.

Nothing personal, I was just pointing out how silly it is to assume that everyone has the same kind of internet connection.

 

[Jay]

I do not condone this practice and go out of my way to make sure to fully play and enjoy their games once they are cracked while they don't get a single penny from me. I would have paid full value for AC2. Yet, I played a cracked version and they got jack squat. At some point, someone, somewhere needs to put this into perspective.

I need to have a continual internet connection to play your game? Really? There's no in between? Perhaps it can check to validate if I have a "proper" cd-key everytime I open it? Or heck, they can go back in the day where when you bought the game, you needed the manual and some funky gadget to answer questions on the screen.

 

[Jiarn]

Hm, not quite the question I was asking in this thread. All I'm hearing is how much DRM is disliked, but no real reasons why a "Constant Connection DRM" is so impossible to expect in this day and age.

 

[figmentPez]

All I'm hearing is how much DRM is disliked, but no real reasons why a "Constant Connection DRM" is so impossible to expect in this day and age.

Then you're not paying attention. What part of "I can't get a reliable internet connection" don't you understand? Where I live I have 3 options for internet: Comcast, satellite and dial-up. Even 3G mobile internet isn't an option. Because Comcast has a limited monopoly, they treat their customers like crap, and their service is spotty. The same holds true for many cable companies that are the sole providers for a given area. When we first moved here, there wasn't cable at all, so we had satellite for TV and dial-up internet. The satellite feed went out if it rained hard, and despite being in rainy SE Texas, that meant it still went out less than the cable did where we used to live.

Or perhaps I need to actually link to some of the news stories about the release of Settlers 7. Like how entire countries were locked out of the game, despite the game actually being for sale there. Or how some players waited weeks for access to work. Intrusive DRM does not work. It frustrates legitimate consumers, while pirates get better compatibility and fewer hurdles to jump through. I don't pirate, but sometimes I wish I did. (Like when there have been conflicts between multiple-DRM laden games. Games for Windows Live and Steam don't always get along, I had a few times when Red Faction Guerilla and Batman: Arkham Asylum each had the two DRMs fighting over which latest version was the correct one, each patching over the other's patch.)

 

[AshburnerX]

Hm, not quite the question I was asking in this thread. All I'm hearing is how much DRM is disliked, but no real reasons why a "Constant Connection DRM" is so impossible to expect in this day and age.

Klew already answered that for you: Some people live or work in areas where they can't have a constant internet connection. For instance, people who live out in the boonies, travel constantly, or simply have inconsistent service. Even then, the question is how long until Activision takes down the authentication server? How do we know they will provide us with a patch to disable the authentication? What if they don't?

It's just a shitty way to go about it, when Steam's "Go online when you start it up and it checks it, then your good" is much more sensible.

 

[Shakey]

I can't get DSL at my house, and won't buy satellite internet because of usage restrictions. It may sound crazy, but I wouldn't want to pay $20 a month for another phone line on top of the $25 for a dialup connection just so an off-line game can verify it's legit. It seems like a useless hassle, since it doesn't make a difference compared to other options.

 

[Dave]

I agree with Jay. Most of the time if I have a game that requires a a constant connection I will not only purchase the game but also download the crack. If I own a game I want to play the damned game.

 

[Soliloquy]

I'll just add in another voice saying that you'd be surprised how many times my broadband internet cuts out for a minute or two, which would cause the game to stop on me.

There's also the times I want to play a game on an airplane, or in a coffee shop that doesn't offer free internet, or in an apartment that I just moved in to but couldn't afford an internet connection for yet.

So, as a consumer, I prefer games that I can actually play.

And, to make things clear, I don't pirate. I used to occasionally, but out of guilt I eventually bought an on-sale copy of every game that I pirated over the years. (Except for Spore. Dear God, I could never bring myself to pay good money for Spore.)

 

[Jiarn]

Then I guess apologies are in order, I really did not know that stable connections were still largely an issue and I can understand the frustration.

 

[Hailey Knight]

Herp derp.

It's okay, man. It's okay. We all bros here.

 

[Jiarn]

Well I guess that's what I get for being sincere.

 

[Chibibar]

If the game is like Steam DRM system, I have no problem with it. You log on to Steam, download the game, it verify and authenticates and you CAN play offline. This is great! there are periods of time where internet may get cut off for long periods of time. I lost internet for a WEEK since my neighbors was digging and cut off internet for the whole neighborhood. I didn't have u-verse (TV) for a week and no internet. I was able to entertain myself with my games from Steam. I won't be able to play AC2 if that happen to me (which I don't own)

Now.... MMORPG requires constant connection, but it also "saves" (with a few minutes lost here and there depending on lags and such) but generally most people have no issues, but games like AC2 doesn't even do that. You lose connection = lost progress that are unsaved. How mess up is that?

 

[Hailey Knight]

Well I guess that's what I get for being sincere.

You shouldn't apologize. You should laugh at them. Laugh hard.

 

[SpecialKO]

Now.... MMORPG requires constant connection, but it also "saves" (with a few minutes lost here and there depending on lags and such) but generally most people have no issues, but games like AC2 doesn't even do that. You lose connection = lost progress that are unsaved. How mess up is that?

That's because MMOs actually use the server connections to create the game experience, unlike Ubisoft's DRM system which does nothing except annoy legitimate users while calling it anti-piracy.

 

[GasBandit]

Now.... MMORPG requires constant connection, but it also "saves" (with a few minutes lost here and there depending on lags and such) but generally most people have no issues, but games like AC2 doesn't even do that. You lose connection = lost progress that are unsaved. How mess up is that?

That's because MMOs actually use the server connections to create the game experience, unlike Ubisoft's DRM system which does nothing except annoy legitimate users while calling it anti-piracy.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. The MMO, you're connecting to a server that actually houses the world you're playing in, which is where the subscription fee comes in to pay for the maintenance of that server. "Call home" DRM such as used by ubisoft does nothing except disallow you from playing the game you paid for without discrete, repeated, instantiated permission delivered explicitly from ubisoft's servers of questionable viability for each gaming session. That's as irritating as having to go get your key from your landlord EVERY time you want into your apartment. Furthermore, DRM costs money and only inconveniences paying customers. I guarantee you nobody who wanted to play Assassin's Creed 2 without paying for it was in any way inconvenienced by Ubisoft's DRM once the crack came out. But lots of paying customers had problems when the ubisoft servers went down.

How long is Ubisoft going to keep the servers that make these games work?

Heh, who says they can keep them working NOW? (See FigmentPez's comment)

 

[strawman]

I hate to be the annoying one here, but...

You don't like it, you don't buy it.

Don't support the companies and people that make entertainment for you if the hoops they force you through are too onerous.

There are far too many games, many of them better, for you to be wasting your time on this form of entertainment. Unless, of course, you are a masochist and you address your partner as "Dominatrix ...."

There is NOTHING unethical about them adding bad DRM to THEIR product. Breaking it is undeniably unethical.

Period.

End of story.

You are not required to purchase their product.

And, quite frankly, I wish you wouldn't. Then this stuff would eventually go away.

But for crying out loud - it's entertainment. Does it really matter?

 

[Ravenpoe]

But for crying out loud - it's entertainment. Does it really matter?

For many of us here, video games are a passionate hobby. It's natural, then, for us to be vocal about our distaste towards the practices of some of the big creators of said hobby, especially towards a practice that is growing more commonplace and aggressive.

Speaking with your wallet is certainly something that should be done, but there's no reason to remain silent while doing so.

 

[GasBandit]

I hate to be the annoying one here, but...

You don't like it, you don't buy it.

Don't support the companies and people that make entertainment for you if the hoops they force you through are too onerous.

Oh, don't worry... we don't

 

[Kiff]

I hate to be the annoying one here, but...

You don't like it, you don't buy it.

Don't support the companies and people that make entertainment for you if the hoops they force you through are too onerous.

There are far too many games, many of them better, for you to be wasting your time on this form of entertainment. Unless, of course, you are a masochist and you address your partner as "Dominatrix ...."

There is NOTHING unethical about them adding bad DRM to THEIR product. Breaking it is undeniably unethical.

Period.

End of story.

You are not required to purchase their product.

And, quite frankly, I wish you wouldn't. Then this stuff would eventually go away.

But for crying out loud - it's entertainment. Does it really matter?

^

What he said.

Furthermore, all they need to do is slap on a note in the PC requirements section. "Internet Connection Required".

How is it the companies problem if you have crappy internet access that hiccups? Do you take a blender back to the store and demand a refund if your electricity goes out and you can't use it?

 

[Dave]

I'm on the fence about this one. On the one hand I see the point of the companies. The DRM is in DIRECT response to people thinking it's okay to pirate & steal the products they worked so hard on. On the other hand, 99% of the people harmed by these draconian tactics are not the ones who are causing the issue in the first place. In fact, I would argue that the only people this DOESN'T hurt are the very ones who are causing the problem. Pirates always find ways around the DRM anyway so it just doesn't work.

But NOT having any DRM at all doesn't make sense either. That would be like saying, "You shouldn't have any locks on your car doors because a burglar is going to get in anyway." This is short-sighted. DRM may not prevent everything, but it stops a good number of people from being able to pirate.

So while I don't like DRM I fully understand it. I just think there's got to be a better way that doesn't alienate such a large number of people.

 

[Chibibar]

FLP: I agree. I didn't buy AC2 because it of, but also miss out the gaming experience of that particular game.

Now of course some people may gripe but buy it anyways cause they want to know more of the story.

It is like you are stuck at a cliff hanger on previous game, but have to deal with DRM on the next game to get the resolution. Would you just leave it at a cliffhanger? or deal with it to get the ending?

Also, the main problem is trend. More and more companies are doing this (DRM in general just not this particular version) but games are still selling across the board (I am not talking about just AC2) so we, as consumers, have to deal with it now, or more companies might go this direction and we don't have a choice and play only old games since all new games (in the future) will have DRM (extreme scenario outlook)

---------- Post added at 10:22 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:20 AM ----------

I'm on the fence about this one. On the one hand I see the point of the companies. The DRM is in DIRECT response to people thinking it's okay to pirate & steal the products they worked so hard on. On the other hand, 99% of the people harmed by these draconian tactics are not the ones who are causing the issue in the first place. In fact, I would argue that the only people this DOESN'T hurt are the very ones who are causing the problem. Pirates always find ways around the DRM anyway so it just doesn't work.

But NOT having any DRM at all doesn't make sense either. That would be like saying, "You shouldn't have any locks on your car doors because a burglar is going to get in anyway." This is short-sighted. DRM may not prevent everything, but it stops a good number of people from being able to pirate.

So while I don't like DRM I fully understand it. I just think there's got to be a better way that doesn't alienate such a large number of people.

Personally, I say go with Steam method. Phone home once in a while (i.e. buying new games, downloading and such) to verify all your games are legit and allow offline play.

It is a version of DRM I can live with and accepts. It is EASY on me and I can still play my games offline as much as I want (exception would be online games like TF2 and MMORPG but we already cover those)

 

[AshburnerX]

How is it the companies problem if you have crappy internet access that hiccups? Do you take a blender back to the store and demand a refund if your electricity goes out and you can't use it?

You KNOW you need power to run a blender without being told by the box. You'd have no way of knowing you'd need a constant internet connection unless they told you. In this situation, you are totally justified in asking for a refund.

Besides, as has already been stated, you can lose your ability to play the game through no fault of your own if their servers go down. That's like a basketball company showing up to your house, taking your ball and telling you that your not allowed to use it for the next 6-12 hours (or for-ev-er) because their factory isn't running. Why should you not be able to play? You already bought and payed for the ball, you shouldn't need their permission to use it!

 

[Necronic]

I don't get how people have been screwed up by DRM though. Ok, I could see it with an unstable/non-existant internet connections and games that require them. Those games, as has been said before, shouldn't be bought. Instead go by a Stardock game. They don't believe in DRM (and subsequently their release of Demigod as Fubarred due to the number of pirated accounts trying to log in.) Their single player games are incredible though (Demigod sucked either way).

Other than the constant online DRM, I've never had a problem with DRM whatsoever.

 

[AshburnerX]

Other than the constant online DRM, I've never had a problem with DRM whatsoever.

I used to have some serious problems with Starforce, which kept slowing my computer to a crawl anytime I installed a game that used it. It certainly doesn't help that my DVD drive only likes to read discs when it wants to, making it REALLY hard for me to play games that require having the disc in the drive while playing. It's one of the reasons I love Steam so much: I can just log-on, get authenticated once, then play as much as I want.

 

[Chibibar]

I don't get how people have been screwed up by DRM though. Ok, I could see it with an unstable/non-existant internet connections and games that require them. Those games, as has been said before, shouldn't be bought. Instead go by a Stardock game. They don't believe in DRM (and subsequently their release of Demigod as Fubarred due to the number of pirated accounts trying to log in.) Their single player games are incredible though (Demigod sucked either way).

Other than the constant online DRM, I've never had a problem with DRM whatsoever.

Some DRM doesn't give many people issue like Steam. I have seen very few if any complain on Steam's DRM.

Now SecureROM (I think that is what it is called) is a mess if you try to uninstall it. I read that is can mess up your HDD if you wish to uninstall it. (fixed I believe)
Sony DRM was the worst in terms of installing in some weird part of your hdd that can't be removed without jacking your HDD.
AC2 DRM - need constant connection.

DRM that requires you to have constant connection, constant scanning your PC, or constant anything while you are playing can really put a damper in your game play. DRM shouldn't be the factor that you can't play your game. I like some of the examples given above, what if you PC is working perfectly but no internet? now you can't play a single player game which the gameplay itself DOESN'T require internet that is just silly IMO. If the gameplay requires internet, then the box will say "internet require" then it is the user's fault for buying and later complain about the internet requirement.

but when AC2 came out, I believe the box didn't say "require internet" (I don't remember seeing it, but I read some reviews and didn't buy it because of DRM)

 

[Kiff]

How is it the companies problem if you have crappy internet access that hiccups? Do you take a blender back to the store and demand a refund if your electricity goes out and you can't use it?

You KNOW you need power to run a blender without being told by the box. You'd have no way of knowing you'd need a constant internet connection unless they told you. In this situation, you are totally justified in asking for a refund.

Besides, as has already been stated, you can lose your ability to play the game through no fault of your own if their servers go down. That's like a basketball company showing up to your house, taking your ball and telling you that your not allowed to use it for the next 6-12 hours (or for-ev-er) because their factory isn't running. Why should you not be able to play? You already bought and payed for the ball, you shouldn't need their permission to use it![/QUOTE]

As I said, they can fix the issue by slapping a big red "Internet Connection Required to Play" sticker on the box under PC requirements.

 

[GasBandit]

I'm on the fence about this one. On the one hand I see the point of the companies. The DRM is in DIRECT response to people thinking it's okay to pirate & steal the products they worked so hard on. On the other hand, 99% of the people harmed by these draconian tactics are not the ones who are causing the issue in the first place. In fact, I would argue that the only people this DOESN'T hurt are the very ones who are causing the problem. Pirates always find ways around the DRM anyway so it just doesn't work.

But NOT having any DRM at all doesn't make sense either. That would be like saying, "You shouldn't have any locks on your car doors because a burglar is going to get in anyway." This is short-sighted. DRM may not prevent everything, but it stops a good number of people from being able to pirate.

So while I don't like DRM I fully understand it. I just think there's got to be a better way that doesn't alienate such a large number of people.

DRM is less like putting a lock on your car door and more like making the starter call chevrolet headquarters every time you turn the key to get permission for you to drive your car.... and your engine gets bad reception frequently. Whereas, the majority of people it was designed to stop (the pirates) just know to just swap out the starter.

You may understand the motivation BEHIND DRM, but you must also understand DRM is much more effective at irritating genuine customers than it is in preventing piracy.

You know what's a lot more effective at combating piracy? A reasonable pricing point. An updated business model that doesn't rely on gouging your potential customers for 60 dollars right up front for a game that has somewhere between 3 and 5 hours of content (I'm looking at you, Call of Duty franchise). Frequent expansion pack/DLC additions.

---------- Post added at 11:02 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:00 AM ----------

As I said, they can fix the issue by slapping a big red "Internet Connection Required to Play" sticker on the box under PC requirements.

Slapping a "cellular connection required to drive" sticker on a car doesn't mean people won't rail about how it sucks, nor stop O'Reilly from selling replacement starters.

 

[Dave]

You may understand the motivation BEHIND DRM, but you must also understand DRM is much more effective at irritating genuine customers than it is in preventing piracy.

Grasshopper! You must re-read my post! I said this very thing already.

My big question has already been asked also. And that's how long will these servers be working? I mean, I sometimes go back and play Wizardry, for God's sake! And that came out in the 80s! Will they leave game servers up forever? Because that's how long I should be able to play these games.