Export thread

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.

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.

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

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.

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?

Jiarn said:

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

Click to expand...

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

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.

Jiarn said:

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.

Click to expand...

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

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.

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.

Jiarn said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.)

Jiarn said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

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.

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.

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.)

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.

Jiarn said:

Herp derp.

Click to expand...

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

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

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?

Jiarn said:

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

Click to expand...

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

Chibibar said:

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?

Click to expand...

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.

SpecialKO;455870][QUOTE=Chibibar said:

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?

Click to expand...

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.

Cog said:

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

Click to expand...

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

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?

First Lady Puffinstuff said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

First Lady Puffinstuff said:

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.

Click to expand...

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

First Lady Puffinstuff said:

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?

Click to expand...

^

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?

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.

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 ----------

Dave said:

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.

Click to expand...

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)

Kiff said:

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?

Click to expand...

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!

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.

Necronic said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

Necronic said:

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.

Click to expand...

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)

AshburnerX;455998][QUOTE=Kiff said:

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?

Click to expand...

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.

Dave said:

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.

Click to expand...

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 ----------

Kiff said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

GasBandit said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Kiff said:

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

Click to expand...

I would like it to be less ambiguous - Perpetual/Continuous internet connection required

"GasBandit said:

Dave said:

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.

Click to expand...

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 ----------

Kiff said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

I agree. I think price DOES make a big difference.

Pirates are getting pretty good at cracking DRM and finding ways around it.

I hate to keep using Steam as an example but it is a good one. They are making money (I assume since they are still in business) with their software and direct download. They even have sales on games which people gobble them up like hotcakes (I know I take advantage of that) I got TONS of game from Steam.

Steam DOES have DRM (authenticate via their server once and can play offline or online) that is awesome. why can't other business model follow that?

---------- Post added at 11:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:06 AM ----------

Dave;456044][QUOTE=GasBandit said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.[/QUOTE]

heh... I just recently bust out my police quest series and master of orion II
I know what you mean.

Dave;456044][QUOTE=GasBandit said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.[/QUOTE]

Sorry, I meant my post to be more in conjunction with yours rather than in contention, using the metaphorical "you" not the specific "you." ...with only fixing the metaphor.

---------- Post added at 11:14 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:09 AM ----------

I also have an issue with steam, though. What happens if, 15 years from now, you have the sudden urge to play Left 4 Dead but don't have it installed because you've gone through 4 computers in the interim, and for some reason steam no longer exists?

I still play Ultima Underworld 1 and 2 from time to time, the best first person RPGs the mid 90s had to offer. I still say Whiplash is the best multiplayer racing game ever to be released on the PC. All games of this appropriate age.

GasBandit said:

What happens if, 15 years from now, you have the sudden urge to play Left 4 Dead

Click to expand...

15 years from now they don't care. They aren't interested in supporting a 15 year old game, and it's quite possible that you won't be able to find a computer/OS capable of playing it without problems unless you keep the original machine you used for it.

The primary question we are really getting down it is this:

Do we own a game we purchase, or are we merely licensing software?

Microsoft does not support windows 3.1. If you work at it, you can find the software, and you can get it running on a core i7 processor. But do you become angry with Microsoft because they made it require certain hardware and drivers that are no longer available or supported today?

Do you have any 16mm films in your house? If you did, then do you become angry with the company that distributed Night of The Living Dead on film because they made it a requirement that you must use a 16mm film projector to view the media?

The only difference is that the constant internet connection requirement is an artificial one to combat piracy. But it's really no different than the inherent anti-piracy features built into the 16mm film - each copy became progressively worse due to the analog nature of the medium.

But here's a quick question. Another method of copy protection is the venerable dongle. You stick a USB gadget in the USB connector on your computer and it will enable gameplay. Unplug it and the game turns off. This way you can sell the game to a friend - because the dongle goes along with it and you can no longer play it. It's completely anonymous, requiring no registration, and they can't track your usage.

Would you rather see them use a dongle than an internet connection?

Eventually, the dongle will no longer work on later operating systems and hardware configurations. Further, it's a pain to deal with dongle software problems.

But when you are selling a game that has a profit potential of $60 million, and you have solid numbers that show that lower protection will result in a "small" 2% loss of that profit, you may come to decide that $1.2 million is worth the additional trouble of the higher protection.

GasBandit said:

I also have an issue with steam, though. What happens if, 15 years from now, you have the sudden urge to play Left 4 Dead but don't have it installed because you've gone through 4 computers in the interim, and for some reason steam no longer exists?

Click to expand...

This is a concern, but at this point, I'd be surprised if Valve didn't have a planned contingency plan for this of some kind.

As to the whole "don't buy it angle", I am totally fine with that. It is why I never Ubisoft games for the PC, and do my research before getting any for my consoles about any strange authentification issues.

I do buy games on Steam, because their DRM (so far) allows me to maintain the play experience that I want without interfering with my ability, say, to watch an HD-streaming movie, or download a big system update, while I play Civilization by throttling my internet connection with a never-ending-handshake routine.

GasBandit;456052][QUOTE=Dave;456044][QUOTE=GasBandit said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.[/QUOTE]

Sorry, I meant my post to be more in conjunction with yours rather than in contention, using the metaphorical "you" not the specific "you." ...with only fixing the metaphor.

---------- Post added at 11:14 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:09 AM ----------

I also have an issue with steam, though. What happens if, 15 years from now, you have the sudden urge to play Left 4 Dead but don't have it installed because you've gone through 4 computers in the interim, and for some reason steam no longer exists?

I still play Ultima Underworld 1 and 2 from time to time, the best first person RPGs the mid 90s had to offer. I still say Whiplash is the best multiplayer racing game ever to be released on the PC. All games of this appropriate age.[/QUOTE]

In 15 years, you'll be able to do what I did for Descent I and II. Find an emulator for Windows 7 (similar to DosBox) and download the game. Aren't the source codes for game released eventually? I mean, really, you could say the same about any outdated game. It doesn't mean you didn't get your monies worth when you bought it.

GasBandit said:

I also have an issue with steam, though. What happens if, 15 years from now, you have the sudden urge to play Left 4 Dead but don't have it installed because you've gone through 4 computers in the interim, and for some reason steam no longer exists?

Click to expand...

Valve is on record as stating that they DO have a method to deactivate the require Steam Authentication and make their games run without Steam, and have pledged that they WILL issue patches in the event that they even need to shut it down or the company goes out of business. They made this statement right after they released HL2, I believe.

Kiff said:

In 15 years, you'll be able to do what I did for Descent I and II. Find an emulator for Windows 7 (similar to DosBox) and download the game. Aren't the source codes for game released eventually?

Click to expand...

Only if the developer so decides to, which is still an extreme rarity. Otherwise what you're describing is still just as illegal as piracy. Interplay still exists and still holds the rights to the Descent franchise... and even though the source code was released, it was released "under the terms of a non-free license."

AshburnerX;456066][QUOTE=GasBandit said:

I also have an issue with steam, though. What happens if, 15 years from now, you have the sudden urge to play Left 4 Dead but don't have it installed because you've gone through 4 computers in the interim, and for some reason steam no longer exists?

Click to expand...

Valve is on record as stating that they DO have a method to deactivate the require Steam Authentication and make their games run without Steam, and have pledged that they WILL issue patches in the event that they even need to shut it down or the company goes out of business. They made this statement right after they released HL2, I believe.[/QUOTE]

That's good for those games already installed, but (and this is a genuine question), are you able to "reinstall" games without steam? Like I said... 3 or 4 computers down the line, steam might not be there to first-time-authenticate your reinstallation, if such is even possible.

It all just raises too much discomfort with me, personally.

GOG.com is getting a lot of my business though, these days, even though I was ticked off by their "we're closing" publicity stunt.

First Lady Puffinstuff said:

Would you rather see them use a dongle than an internet connection?

Eventually, the dongle will no longer work on later operating systems and hardware configurations. Further, it's a pain to deal with dongle software problems.

Click to expand...

As much of a pain as dongles are, it's expressly legal to bypass the DRM if the software company isn't supporting the dongle anymore. If I'm no mistaken it's one of the exceptions explicitly added to the DMCA. No such exemption exists for online activation. If a company refuses to support it's online activation, you can't legally bypass that DRM; if the company won't support a dongle, you can.


So, for those of you who think that DRM is no big deal as long as the consumer is made aware of it, just how much would you put up with as long as the box said "broadband internet connection required to play". Some of these have already been considered by game companies:
0. Some of the game's code for saving is stored on a remote server (this is the method used in AC2, SC:C, S7, etc. as I understand it)
1. Some of the game's code for gameplay is stored on a remote server and lag in the connection may cause side effects like strangely behaving enemies, inventory glitches, texture loading problems, etc.
2. The entire game is stored on a remote server and loading the game will depend on current demand. The more people playing, the longer the load time.
3. All user input is processed on a remote server. This means all the lag problems of an online FPS will be added to every single player game. (Yeah, try playing Rock Band like that.)
4. The entire game is run on a remote server (a la OnLive). Your screen resolution and all other video options are preset and heavily compressed to send to you. All actions are noticeably laggy (with no client-side prediction possible). Not only does your internet need to be steady, it also needs to be fast the whole time as well.


Straight up question, how much will you put up with before it's worth complaining about? No counterarguments about "it's their right" (fine, it is, but I'm asking when exercising that right will keep you from buying). No strawmen about "what do you want, no DRM at all?" (I'm not asking what I want, I'm asking what you'll put up with.) It's this simple, as long as the DRM fails to stop pirates, and fails to stop consumers from buying, then it's going to keep getting more severe. At what point do you consider DRM to be too intrusive to put up with? I've made my decision by striking Assassin's Creed 2 from my list of potential purchases. Where will you draw the line?

GasBandit said:

AshburnerX;456066][QUOTE=GasBandit said:

I also have an issue with steam, though. What happens if, 15 years from now, you have the sudden urge to play Left 4 Dead but don't have it installed because you've gone through 4 computers in the interim, and for some reason steam no longer exists?

Click to expand...

Valve is on record as stating that they DO have a method to deactivate the require Steam Authentication and make their games run without Steam, and have pledged that they WILL issue patches in the event that they even need to shut it down or the company goes out of business. They made this statement right after they released HL2, I believe.

Click to expand...

That's good for those games already installed, but (and this is a genuine question), are you able to "reinstall" games without steam? Like I said... 3 or 4 computers down the line, steam might not be there to first-time-authenticate your reinstallation, if such is even possible.

[/QUOTE]

Your probably going to be out of luck if you bought the game over Steam and don't have it installed, as you might not be able to get the source files anymore, but if you bought the disc, all you'll need is the patch. This is one of the reasons I highly advise people to back up their Steam folders periodically. Also, I should have made it clear: Valve's promise only applies to the games it has created. I don't think they can remove the protection from other titles unless the other companies OK it.

Honestly, it all comes down whether you want cheap games with unobtrusive DRM you MIGHT lose access to down the line, or you demand the a physical copy and all the prices that entails. I can live with the distant chance I could lose some old games, as long as I get them cheaply.

I love physical copies, mostly because I love displaying my boxes.... and the convienence.

Where I draw the line?

If a single player game requires constant internet to play and all content are on my system (flash game excluded like FB games) I won't buy them (like FP, AC2 is off my list)

What I will put up with?
Steam DRM system. Granted Gas ask a VERY valid question in terms of what about the software that I purchase but didn't download (I got tons of those due to space issue)

AshburnerX said:

Honestly, it all comes down whether you want cheap games with unobtrusive DRM you MIGHT lose access to down the line, or you demand the a physical copy and all the prices that entails. I can live with the distant chance I could lose some old games, as long as I get them cheaply.

Click to expand...

I think big publishers (since they have the resources to take a few risks), should try something along this line.

Two (approximate) options:

A) A "play" license: entitles you to play on the publisher's servers via digital download and authentification. Play is at the sufferance/maintenance of the company servers, but cheap. Could possibly be tied into a subscription service of some kind (like Rhapsody, except for games).

B) A "box" license: entitles you to a physical copy of the game and access to the publisher's servers if you wish. Much more expensive than a "play" license, but ensures that you have a playable copy of the game even when the publisher stops supporting it, or access to their servers is otherwise denied.

Or some such. I've thought for a long time that if publishers want to take back the bargain-bin/used/coupon gaming market, they need to stop approaching consumers as if they all have the same purchasing behavior.

Dongles have a literal lifetime limiit though. They WILL fail. I don't dislike the dongle idea though.

And Gas, your attitude on this surprises me a bit considering your politics. Those companies can do whatever they want. You have a choice to not buy it. Funny thing is, the people that complain about DRM the most often seem to be the people that still HAVE to buy it. If a customer is unable or unwilling to actualize their own market power then the failure rests on their shoulders, not the companies.

Basically, anyone here who bought a game that they knew had DRM they didn't like simply can't complain about it, or at least should mitigate the complaint with "but the game is so awesome it doesn't matter." If you can't do that then you are a junkie who doesn't like his dealers product, but buys it nonetheless.

Th DRM argument seems to revolve around a massive divide in the answer to this question: Does it even work? Its an interesting argument. Here's my response.

Anyone who doesn't think DRM works should immediately disable all of their anti-viruses, run in admin mode, and change all of their passwords to password.

No matter what your PC security is, you are still hackable. So why even use it? Because all security relies on removing the path of least resistance. It isn't a matter of stopping everything. Its about making it harder. Hell, that's even how a dam works. To think that security systems are flawed because someone can still break them is ridiculous, and flies in the face of the entire understanding of security systems.

Now, adding a value comparison of 'how much does it hurt the customer vs how much does it protect' is a better argument. But...take a step back.

If you are buying the product anyways then you make this equation very simple.

Just some thoughts on the subject:

1) Ubisoft's DRM takes things to far. By all means people should not buy games that use it and should complain about it, make your reason for lack of purchase known. That said, don't pirate the games as a response. You only add fuel to the fire and allow Ubisoft and other developers to justify their DRM. To companies a pirate is a pirate and they will try to stop them, don't buy the game, don't pirate the game and help break the cycle.

2) Steam is awesome. I built my gaming machine soon after Steam for mac came out because I was so impressed with how far it had come from the days of CS 1.6 when I first used it (before "switching" to the mac).

3) Gas you can backup your game files and installs in steam, I've never used it though so I don't know the full extent.

Necronic said:

And Gas, your attitude on this surprises me a bit considering your politics. Those companies can do whatever they want. You have a choice to not buy it.

Click to expand...

My politics are not in conflict with my stance here. I never said the company can't do what they want, I said they were stupid for doing *this.* Never have I advocated making DRM illegal. I've simply said it's an ineffective and backward way to go about this, and that they use it to cover up an antiquated and less sustainable business practice.

Just to switch gears a bit, consider New York. They've raised the taxes on cigarettes so high that there is now an actual, functioning black market for cigarettes. Surprise surprise, higher prices have led to decreased overall revenue, both for the city in taxes and the cigarette makers and sellers as profits. The problem here is not that cigarettes need a complicated licensing/rights management scheme to police them, it's that the price has far exceeded the value. Thus, the black cigarette market, and thus, the rampant nature of software piracy.

I thought they were taxing the hell of cigarettes in New York in an attempt to keep people from smoking them. You know, tax it until it's too expensive to keep buying them?

Covar said:

3) Gas you can backup your game files and installs in steam, I've never used it though so I don't know the full extent.

Click to expand...

I back-up all the Steam games I care about, and I've installed from the back-up to save time downloading. If there is a patch for Valve games that makes retail copies playable without Steam, I'd assume it would work on back-ups as well. It's a pretty flexible system as well, it can automatically break up the back-up over multiple discs (CD, DVD, dual-layer DVD or a custom size). You can back up multiple games together, or just one at a time.

AshburnerX said:

I thought they were taxing the hell of cigarettes in New York in an attempt to keep people from smoking them. You know, tax it until it's too expensive to keep buying them?

Click to expand...

At least from Bloomberg's perspective, that's exactly why they're doing it. If he could pull it off, he would ban cigarettes from NYC entirely.

SpecialKO;456141][QUOTE=AshburnerX said:

I thought they were taxing the hell of cigarettes in New York in an attempt to keep people from smoking them. You know, tax it until it's too expensive to keep buying them?

Click to expand...

At least from Bloomberg's perspective, that's exactly why they're doing it. If he could pull it off, he would ban cigarettes from NYC entirely.[/QUOTE]

Yea, but then people can still smoke in their own home right? black market (or go across state line) buy cigs and drive back.

GasBandit said:

it's that the price has far exceeded the value. Thus, the black cigarette market, and thus, the rampant nature of software piracy.

Click to expand...

The value is not a fixed point, everyone has different values for a given object. So you can't really say that the price has far exceeded the value, especially given that millions of customers still buy at the elevated rates in NY.

The reason a black market exists is that there is that the cheaper end of the market is so under-served that new enterprises can make significant money by serving that market.

Nothing more, nothing less.

The PC game market has no such problem - there are hundreds of games in most genres at every price point from $1.99 through $200. Furthermore, every game lowers its price over time in order to capture the greatest profit potential it can.

If people are willing to wait and run a year or five behind the curve they can get every game they want at the price they want. It's the same game.

What people are paying $60 for is the ability to play the game right now.

At $60 it's worth it to the company to use the most strict DRM possible. When they sell it on the bargain rack for $15 they may weaken the DRM because it causes too many support issues, reducing their profit.

I have never understood people paying full price for a game. In the last year I got the entire total war collection for like 40$, most of which was for Empire total war (which, ironically, is the worst of the games).

And yeah, Gas I get that argument. You dislike it because its a stupid business practice. I don't know if I can agree though. Consider Ubisoft. Their revenue has grown consistently over the last decade or so to ~400 mil ~2002 to >1bil in 2008. Hard to argue that their business model isn't working.

Chibibar;456144][QUOTE=SpecialKO;456141][QUOTE=AshburnerX said:

I thought they were taxing the hell of cigarettes in New York in an attempt to keep people from smoking them. You know, tax it until it's too expensive to keep buying them?

Click to expand...

At least from Bloomberg's perspective, that's exactly why they're doing it. If he could pull it off, he would ban cigarettes from NYC entirely.[/QUOTE]

Yea, but then people can still smoke in their own home right? black market (or go across state line) buy cigs and drive back.[/QUOTE]

No, the latest cigarettes have tobacco rights management (TRM) built in with location awareness so you can't, for instance, light up a cigarette purchased in NJ if you are currently located in NY. They automatically self-extinguish when you cross the border with a lit one even.

I can't tell if they're using GPS or some other system, but it's pretty neat technology.

---------- Post added at 05:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:09 PM ----------

SpecialKO;456141][QUOTE=AshburnerX said:

I thought they were taxing the hell of cigarettes in New York in an attempt to keep people from smoking them. You know, tax it until it's too expensive to keep buying them?

Click to expand...

At least from Bloomberg's perspective, that's exactly why they're doing it. If he could pull it off, he would ban cigarettes from NYC entirely.[/QUOTE]

I don't believe anyone in the government is dumb enough to cut that much revenue out of their budget. Then again I know people who think that the government does want everyone in the country to stop smoking so there you go.

Covar;456183][QUOTE=SpecialKO;456141][QUOTE=AshburnerX said:

I thought they were taxing the hell of cigarettes in New York in an attempt to keep people from smoking them. You know, tax it until it's too expensive to keep buying them?

Click to expand...

At least from Bloomberg's perspective, that's exactly why they're doing it. If he could pull it off, he would ban cigarettes from NYC entirely.[/QUOTE]

I don't believe anyone in the government is dumb enough to cut that much revenue out of their budget. Then again I know people who think that the government does want everyone in the country to stop smoking so there you go.[/QUOTE]

I have to agree. I mean look at the prohibition. That didn't work.

Now with the high taxes, NYC are NOT getting any revenue from the black market cigs.

AshburnerX said:

I thought they were taxing the hell of cigarettes in New York in an attempt to keep people from smoking them. You know, tax it until it's too expensive to keep buying them?

Click to expand...

That's assuredly the underlying intent, but they also wanted the tax revenue. In either case, it just shows what happens when you set your price too high.

First Lady Puffinstuff;456166][QUOTE=GasBandit said:

it's that the price has far exceeded the value. Thus, the black cigarette market, and thus, the rampant nature of software piracy.

Click to expand...

The value is not a fixed point, everyone has different values for a given object. So you can't really say that the price has far exceeded the value, especially given that millions of customers still buy at the elevated rates in NY.

The reason a black market exists is that there is that the cheaper end of the market is so under-served that new enterprises can make significant money by serving that market.

Nothing more, nothing less.

The PC game market has no such problem - there are hundreds of games in most genres at every price point from $1.99 through $200. Furthermore, every game lowers its price over time in order to capture the greatest profit potential it can.

If people are willing to wait and run a year or five behind the curve they can get every game they want at the price they want. It's the same game.

What people are paying $60 for is the ability to play the game right now.

At $60 it's worth it to the company to use the most strict DRM possible. When they sell it on the bargain rack for $15 they may weaken the DRM because it causes too many support issues, reducing their profit.[/QUOTE]

Last I heard Ubisoft hadn't weakened their DRM, but I might have missed it. And the price drop over time isn't an applicable disproof - it's not getting cheaper as a courtesy, it's getting cheaper because it isn't fresh any more.. it's last year's technology (which is ~20 in computer years) and it can't compete with the latest that is out. The same game a year later is much like the same cigarette 20 years later - harder to sell because it isn't fresh. Piracy is the software industry's black cigarette market, and it's so cheap it's free. That nobody there is making a profit from their work is testament to how odious many find DRM to be.

No, value isn't a fixed point of course, obviously, since as you say some are actually willing to shell out the 60. Something about more dollars than sense. But obviously it's to the point where a great many feel the price is too far above the value. It's not just about playing for free, it's that 0 is closer to the true value of the game to these people than 60 is. Whereas I just re-bought games I ALREADY OWNED (and yes, legitimately) on GOG.com for the convenience, new OS compatibility, and... oh yes... the complete lack of DRM.

Necronic said:

I have never understood people paying full price for a game. In the last year I got the entire total war collection for like 40$, most of which was for Empire total war (which, ironically, is the worst of the games).

And yeah, Gas I get that argument. You dislike it because its a stupid business practice. I don't know if I can agree though. Consider Ubisoft. Their revenue has grown consistently over the last decade or so to ~400 mil ~2002 to >1bil in 2008. Hard to argue that their business model isn't working.

Click to expand...

It's making a profit, but it's myopic. They could be making more, and they could be contributing to making "buying" the default process instead of an alternative weighed equally with "pirating." Even the mighty eventually fall, if bad practices persist long enough. Also, remember that the video game industry as a whole has seen unprecedented growth, not just Ubisoft. More money was actually spent on video games this past year than on movies.

There are some truth in value of games. I have personally bought over 10 copies of Starcraft (original and broodwars) cause I keep losing my disks.

I LOVE steam cause I can download anytime (until they go out of business) but still..... until then. I LOVE IT.

There are some games I WILL buy at original price if I feel it is worth it. StarCraft II, Diablo series, WoW (yes I got collectors edition for cataclysm) I have bought the castlevania series (yes got almost all of it except the 64 series)

You know Chibi... if you have an original copy of Starcraft, you can just register it at Battle.net and they'll let you download as many copies of the battlechest version you want for free

There seem to be 3 major topics here. Here they are with my views on them:


1)Price point. Finding an ideal price point is difficult. Its effectively a Laffer curve. However, when revenue is growing this rapidly few companies will say 'we are charging way too much.'

2) Does DRM protect software. See my argument above. If you really believe that DRM does nothing then turn off your anti-virus and leave your car and house doors unlocked. Because someone will break those security systems anyways. Security is never about 100% prevention, its about removing the path of least resistance.

3) Does DRM hurt sales. This isn't the same as asking 'does DRM piss me off'. Those are two very different questions. And, if you're looking for an answer, please see #1.

With regard to GBs statement, there is absolutely no way to prove your viewpoint. Your argument effectively boils down to "do it this other way and you will make more money." Why would any company, change their already very profitable business model without a massive down payment of good reason?

Necronic said:

Why would any company, change their already very profitable business model without a massive down payment of good reason?

Click to expand...

Hehehe, this part makes me lol. Countless profitable companies screwed themselves going down routes that didn't have any reasoning behind their choice, nevermind good reason. I understand your point, but this particular assemblage of words just got to me...

AshburnerX said:

You know Chibi... if you have an original copy of Starcraft, you can just register it at Battle.net and they'll let you download as many copies of the battlechest version you want for free

Click to expand...

Yea. I know that now, but that didn't help me 5 years ago

Chibibar;456184][QUOTE=Covar;456183][QUOTE=SpecialKO;456141][QUOTE=AshburnerX said:

I thought they were taxing the hell of cigarettes in New York in an attempt to keep people from smoking them. You know, tax it until it's too expensive to keep buying them?

Click to expand...

At least from Bloomberg's perspective, that's exactly why they're doing it. If he could pull it off, he would ban cigarettes from NYC entirely.[/QUOTE]

I don't believe anyone in the government is dumb enough to cut that much revenue out of their budget. Then again I know people who think that the government does want everyone in the country to stop smoking so there you go.[/QUOTE]

I have to agree. I mean look at the prohibition. That didn't work.

Now with the high taxes, NYC are NOT getting any revenue from the black market cigs.[/QUOTE]

I don't disagree that it's silly, I'm just pointing out that Mike Bloomberg actually wants to ban cigarettes as an end goal.

SpecialKO said:

I don't disagree that it's silly, I'm just pointing out that Mike Bloomberg actually wants to ban cigarettes as an end goal.

Click to expand...

It is a good goal, but I'm not a smoker. I have a few friends who are. It is HARD to kick the habit (I have seen them over 10 years trying to quit) but you have to have the will do it.

The price of cig is going up, but they are willing to sacrifice other stuff to buy cigs. unless it is banned across the U.S. people will continue to smoke and obtain them one way or another.

Yeah cause the whole illegal thing really killed the Marjiuana market right?

Jiarn said:

Yeah cause the whole illegal thing really killed the Marjiuana market right?

Click to expand...

Well... Marijuana has always been illegal (at least for a long while for many people) alcohol and Cigs are different story. They have been around and legal for sometimes. Taking them away is hard like removing a tax that government institute.

There was a time when alcohol was illegal and you saw how that turn out. Can you imagine the government institute a total ban on alcohol and cigs? slap a fine and jail time? (like Marijuana)
it would be a logistic nightmare!

They'll never BAN cigarettes... banning alcohol simply moved it's market right into the hands of violent mobsters. You'd see the same problem if you banned cigarettes. Besides, what do you DO with contraband cigarettes? BURN THEM? Isn't that kinda of defeating the purpose?

They should just come to your house and cut off your hands every time you torrent a game and play it illegally. That'll stop piracy in it's tracks. No more need for DRMs. Problem solved. I'm a genius.

I know where I'd be applying for work....

Shegokigo said:

They should just come to your house and cut off your hands every time you torrent a game and play it illegally. That'll stop piracy in it's tracks. No more need for DRMs. Problem solved. I'm a genius.

I know where I'd be applying for work....

Click to expand...

You know who that would help? Amputees! The instant people start losing hands, there will be a huge profit motive for companies to develop better (and more game controller friendly) prosthetic hands.

I, for one, welcome our new prosthetic wearing, torrent playing overlords.

First Lady Puffinstuff;456412][QUOTE=Shegokigo said:

They should just come to your house and cut off your hands every time you torrent a game and play it illegally. That'll stop piracy in it's tracks. No more need for DRMs. Problem solved. I'm a genius.

I know where I'd be applying for work....

Click to expand...

You know who that would help? Amputees! The instant people start losing hands, there will be a huge profit motive for companies to develop better (and more game controller friendly) prosthetic hands.

I, for one, welcome our new prosthetic wearing, torrent playing overlords.[/QUOTE]

No, they'd just make one handed/no handed controllers for amputees... which isn't a problem for Microsoft, as they already make them. Or at least that's what my friend over at Get Well Gamers told me, when he approached them about getting some for hospitals.

Also, donate any unwanted gaming equipment to them. Child's Play only takes money, but GWG takes used stuff and donates it to hospitals after refurbishing it.

Chibibar;456383][QUOTE=Jiarn said:

Yeah cause the whole illegal thing really killed the Marjiuana market right?

Click to expand...

Well... Marijuana has always been illegal (at least for a long while for many people) alcohol and Cigs are different story. They have been around and legal for sometimes. Taking them away is hard like removing a tax that government institute.

There was a time when alcohol was illegal and you saw how that turn out. Can you imagine the government institute a total ban on alcohol and cigs? slap a fine and jail time? (like Marijuana)
it would be a logistic nightmare![/QUOTE]


Untrue. Weed was legal up until around 1913.

Kiff;456447][QUOTE=Chibibar;456383][QUOTE=Jiarn said:

Yeah cause the whole illegal thing really killed the Marjiuana market right?

Click to expand...

Well... Marijuana has always been illegal (at least for a long while for many people) alcohol and Cigs are different story. They have been around and legal for sometimes. Taking them away is hard like removing a tax that government institute.

There was a time when alcohol was illegal and you saw how that turn out. Can you imagine the government institute a total ban on alcohol and cigs? slap a fine and jail time? (like Marijuana)
it would be a logistic nightmare![/QUOTE]


Untrue. Weed was legal up until around 1913.[/QUOTE]

ok. I stand corrected (got source?) 1913 to present. That is a long while.

Chibi - our nation tried to ban alcohol entirely in 1920. All it did was create a thriving black market for alcohol which basically created organized crime as we know it. Al Capone made his fortune this way. (Ironically so did Joe Kennedy Sr.... yes, of THOSE Kennedys, which is now why we even know what a Kennedy is at all). It enriched criminals, was entirely ineffective, and was ended in 1933.

Really, our current "war on drugs" is not doing much better but nobody wants to talk about it. All it's doing is putting billions in the pockets of central- and south- american drug lords and sending otherwise non-violent people to jail whose only crime is blazing up a doobie from time to time in the comfort of their own home.

GasBandit said:

Chibi - our nation tried to ban alcohol entirely in 1920. All it did was create a thriving black market for alcohol which basically created organized crime as we know it. Al Capone made his fortune this way. (Ironically so did Joe Kennedy Sr.... yes, of THOSE Kennedys, which is now why we even know what a Kennedy is at all). It enriched criminals, was entirely ineffective, and was ended in 1933.

Really, our current "war on drugs" is not doing much better but nobody wants to talk about it. All it's doing is putting billions in the pockets of central- and south- american drug lords and sending otherwise non-violent people to jail whose only crime is blazing up a doobie from time to time in the comfort of their own home.

Click to expand...

I knew about the alcohol one (from history class) I didn't know about weeds ever being legal. I knew tobacco played a huge part in U.S. history.

In a nation not yet 250 years old, you can safely assume everything was legal at one point. Heck, in some states it used to not be illegal to kill a Mormon.

but anyways... I guess the whole point of DRM is to prevent casual pirates to pirate games, but with the internet, the casual pirates doesn't even need to pirate since the "big league" will hack anyways and post them on the internet for people to download. So how do you stop them? Catch them, fine them, and jail. Thus far it doesn't really scare some of the big leagues cause people are still pirating music (after all the RIAA has done to many people)

Necro post about leaving your PC vulnerable (turn off anti-virus and firewalls) = no DRM idea.
but I think with the new technology available (internet, streaming, direct downloads) might be the new way of distribution.

Look at the new markets
iTunes - making millions with online sales.
Steam - direct download and verify on the server, sure people can work around that (I don't know but I'm sure someone figure it out) and yet doing pretty well on their sales and make profit.

Physical medias are nice to have (I do have over 900+ DVDs) but maybe the industry have to adapt and find way to still have their DRM but not to annoy customer to no end.
Also physical medias allow pirates to pirate like music. It is easy to rip a CD and upload the contents.

Customers have the responsibility to fight against company via their purchasing power. This method does work. How do you think large organization get special discounts.... mass customer base. The consumer gripes and yet continue to buy games like AC2 so the companies who make these annoying DRM will continue to do so. The rest of us will either "discard" the game forever (those refuse to buy) or have to give in eventually cause the company will continue to do what they want as long there is profit to be made

Is there a happy medium? I don't know. I know personally that games on Steam has made me happy (in the PC realms). Console games are another matter (I usually buy used and sometime new)

And that, people, is why it is called progress.

Krisken said:

And that, people, is why it is called progress.

Click to expand...

And, incidentally, congress.