Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Piracy Forced id's Hand To Multiplatform Gaming

Posted by Zonk on Mon Mar 12, 2007 01:07 PM
from the quit-stealing-their-stuff dept.
Entertainment Games
CVG is reporting on comments from a GDC talk last week by id CEO Todd Hollenshead on the necessity of multiplatform development. Essentially, said Hollenshead, id was forced to start developing for consoles because of the rampant piracy of PC games. "Enemy Territory: Quake Wars was given as an example of id's multiplatform direction. Originally in development for PC at the hands of Splash Damage and id Software, the multiplayer-focussed action game is now additionally heading to Xbox 360 and PS3."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] id Resolves DOSBox/GPL Issue 78 comments
The British Gaming Blog is reporting that id Software has successfully resolved the minor issue it had with DOSBox, regarding older PC games being sold on Valve's Steam network. "The problem is all fixed up now with the proper licensing text in the game's readme. Developers working hand in hand with smaller application authors is not all that uncommon; SCUMM has worked closely with point and click masters Revolution and LucasArts to improve compatibility with their games, and hopefully this trend will continue so we can experience more old classics in the future."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Piracy Forced id's Hand To Multiplatform Gaming 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Yeah, because nobody pirates console games, huh? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Seumas (6865) on Monday March 12 2007, @01:10PM (#18319479)
    Thank god nobody pirates console games! . . . oh, wait . . .

    Speaking of which, I wish they would stop lumping some guy at home who burns a game from his buddy to play on his machine in with some guy in china who produces and sells tens of thousands of copies of a game.

    Anyway, I can't remember the last time I played a truly great id game, so I would say the real reason they had to start developing for consoles was to pick from a larger and less discerning player base.
    • Exactly. They keep pumping out crap games (industry wide) then blame pirating for low sales. And while both acts are just as illegal there is a big difference between the 'home' pirate and the one who tries to sell a bunch of pirated games. Even the industries themselves have admitted that piracy did not affect their sales as much as they would like us to believe. This industry has not been able to adapt itself to the new internet economy so instead they blame everyone but themselves for their sale losses
    • Just buy them used.
      • I agree. This is the reason you see more people buying console games. Resale value. You can't resell PC games, so people tend to buy less of them. If you could just bring in your old PC games to the store, and trade them in for new ones, I think a lot more people would be buying them. I also buy a lot of console games used. $10-$20 is a much better price as far as i'm concerned. Sure I don't get bleeding edge games, but I still have fun.

        • I agree. This is the reason you see more people buying console games. Resale value. You can't resell PC games, so people tend to buy less of them. If you could just bring in your old PC games to the store, and trade them in for new ones, I think a lot more people would be buying them.

          I bought used PC games on at least 3 occasions. I bought used copies of "Hitman 2: Silent Assassin" and "SimCity 4" at a 'round the corner game store (real brick&mortar, not black or grey market), as well as a used copy o

          • Those authors and publishers must really hate the library then.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by fimbulvetr (598306)
            When I purchase a game, I definitely consider how some of that money can be gained back by reselling the game. If I could cut my losses somehow, I wouldn't purchase anywhere near the amount of games I purchase now @ $60 apiece. IMO, the only way they can me to fork over that kind of cash is the likelyhood that I will be able to regain 1/3 of that (be it in cash or credit towards another game). They can detest it all they want, but if they take the ability to re-sell it away, they lose me.

            For the record, I g
    • Anyway, I can't remember the last time I played a truly great id game, so I would say the real reason they had to start developing for consoles was to pick from a larger and less discerning player base.

      I'm not much of a gamer and I can remember great ID games. Surely with a 4-digit Slashdot id you must have tried Doom or Quake, so you never play at all or you have a memory problem.

      As for console players, are you sure they're less discerning? I would think that, with the price they pay for the console and fo

        • Re:Yeah, because nobody pirates console games, huh (Score:4, Insightful)

          by hobbesmaster (592205) on Monday March 12 2007, @01:57PM (#18320419)
          I really don't believe that piracy has made id go multiplatform. Their main money making is not from selling games, but from selling game engines. A multiplatform game engine is going to sell better than a single platform game engine, so its in their best interest to have the best multiplatform engines on the market. While all their previous engines have supported consoles, if they also make games for the consoles its likely to help them improve their engine because they'll have more experience with seeing what problems you get when using their APIs on specific platforms.

          I hope that makes sense...
    • It isn't that nobody pirates games, it's just that there's less people pirating games. When pirating requires that I solder some chip into my system, there's a good bet that I won't be doing it, especially with the more expensive systems. Playing pirated games was easiest with the PS1/Dreamcast where you could pirate games without modifying the hardware (PS1 required external dongle). Most systems now require that you physically alter the machine, which most people aren't willing to do. Also, players of PC games tend to be much more savvy, and therefore know where to go to get the pirated games. There's a lot of people on consoles who wouldn't know the first thing about where to get pirated games.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by WED Fan (911325)

      I wish they would stop lumping some guy at home who burns a game from his buddy to play on his machine in with some guy in china who produces and sells tens of thousands of copies of a game.

      Right, when loaning the game wouldn't have worked?

      Let's call them:

      Big Evil Chinese Pirates - Pirates tons of games at $5 a shot, that the second class of pirate won't even spring for.

      Little Cheap Skate Piddle Pirates - Extends the logic that, if I can make a back up copy as fair use, then I should be allowed to ma

    • "I wish they would stop lumping some guy at home who burns a game from his buddy to play on his machine in with some guy in china who produces and sells tens of thousands of copies of a game."

      So, by this token, its alright to shoplift something out of a store for personal consumption, but dammit! don't lump me in with the guy that hijacks a truck full of cigarettes to sell back in Joisey.

      Ignoring the idiots that are going to naturally tell me that even though I've lost a sale to someone that now has no need except for 'good will' to actually purchase my product, that piracy and theft are not the same. I'll never be able to explain to them how it is, and they will never have a rational explanation for why it isn't (yet some teen will try to explain).

      Beyond that, Id is perfectly correct in stating that there is a huge difference in the levels of piracy between consoles and PCs. With a PC, you get all sorts of casual piracy. Download a torrent and its ready to play with no interaction on your part...the idiots can claim that it just jumped onto their hard drives and well, they didn't know it was a dupe because it just worked. With the console, rarely can you simply put in a duped disc. It either requires extensive hacks, such as bootloaders to memory cards, swap and switches (I remember a friend installing a door on his PS2 that could be opened without stopping the first disc from spinning and switching while the motor was still trying to do its job) or buying a $50 mod chip that has little to do with legitimate applications (i.e., I believe the new Wii ModChip can't do imports...something I believe one should ALWAYS be able to play...I'm not a fan of regionlocks...especially if its something I paid for and thats the only reason I know anything about this -- without the regionlock override, there really is no legitimacy other than I WANT TO PLAY 'BACKUPS')

      So yes, big difference between a mass pirater and one that makes one or two copies. Its the difference between grand larceny and shoplifting. Glad you made this point. Not sure why...but glad you did either way.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Cadallin (863437)
        I'm not a teen, and I work for a living, but I'll still at least try to provide a reason why Music and Movie piracy is justifiable.

        You talk as though the rules are sacrosanct. What you ignore is that they exist as a result of a social contract, the entire point of which is to grow the public domain. The idea is that we, society, benefit from the production and public release of works. Thus, to encourage this process, society agrees to certain provisions (copyright). However, the media industry has v

      • So, by this token, its alright to shoplift something out of a store for personal consumption, but dammit! don't lump me in with the guy that hijacks a truck full of cigarettes to sell back in Joisey.

        I think you'll find that if you took these two cases before a judge and jury, the outcomes would be very different, and they might even be prosecuted under different statutes. The OP never said personal-use piracy was OK, just that it was different from running a massive pirate empire for profit. And he's absolutely right.

        Piracy and theft are different in two major ways. First, as many others have stated, when you steal something, you're depriving its rightful owner of physical goods. If you steal something, you have it and he no longer does. That's not the case with piracy.

        Second, it's relatively straightforward to measure the (monetary) amount of damage a thief does, but it's extremely difficult to do so in software piracy cases. If someone steals a CD from Best Buy, that's $14 in damages. If that person instead downloads a rip of that album from a BitTorrent tracker, how do you measure that? Not everyone who pirates something would have purchased it at full price. If, say, 10% of pirates would have bought the album if they couldn't get it otherwise, does that mean the company is out $1.40? And who, exactly, was deprived of that money? Are all of the retail stores in which a person might have bought it entitled to a cut? It's not at all a clear-cut issue.

        As I'm sure is obvious by now, IANAL. YMMV. LOLOMGWTFBBQ.

      • So, by this token, its alright to shoplift something out of a store for personal consumption, but dammit! don't lump me in with the guy that hijacks a truck full of cigarettes to sell back in Joisey.

        You're putting words into the grandparent poster [slashdot.org]'s mouth.

        The grandparent poster didn't say it is was all right, they said that there is a difference. Which there is. A gas station would rather you shoplifted a single pack of cigarettes instead of hijacking their next shipment of cigarettes. Both are still wrong, but they warrant entirely different responses.

        Of course, it's a sillier comparison because you're comparing traditional theft (which deprives the legal owner of a scarce commodity) with copyright infringement (which reduces the artificial scarcity copyright creates). They're different problems with different economics to consider. Indeed...

        Ignoring the idiots that are going to naturally tell me that even though I've lost a sale to someone that now has no need except for 'good will' to actually purchase my product, that piracy and theft are not the same. I'll never be able to explain to them how it is, and they will never have a rational explanation for why it isn't (yet some teen will try to explain).

        I haven't been a teen for a bit over a decade now, but I'll try to explain anyway.

        Theft of property and copyright infringement are different crimes. They have different victims and different economic effects. If a thief breaks in Best Buy and steals a $50 (retail price) Sony TV, Best Buy suffers because they no longer has a TV. Best Buy has lost $40 (or whatever wholesale is). Sony has lost nothing. If the thief breaks into my house and steals my TV, neither Best Buy nor Sony have lost anything, but I've lost $50.

        Conversely, (for the sake of argument) if an infringer breaks into Best Buy and makes an infringing copy of a $50 (retail price) game, Best Buy still has the original. The value of that original is slightly reduced because the artificial scarcity has dropped. This is potentially a "lost sale." This lost revenue from potential sale impacts both Sony and Best Buy. How much? Definitely not $50. The reality is that some portion of copyright infringers, if infringement was not an option, would not purchase the game. It's hard guess what the percentage is, but let's guess only 10%. Now on average over multiple illegal copies, Sony has lost $36 (90% of the $40 they'd expect) and Best Buy $9. Total loss to "the world": $45.

        By any stretch of the imagination, clearly individual copyright infringement cases are slightly less harmful than individual cases of theft. The total economic loss for the above hypothetical example is $45 to $50. Both are bad, but given the choice I'd prefer losing $45 to $50. The situation because even more clear if you believe the "can't or won't pay for it" percentage is higher, or if the thefts involve damage to other property (breaking a window to get in).

        The situation gets even weirder when I buy the game. So when I bought my $50 Sony TV, I also bought this $50 game. Our hypothetical and slightly insane thief breaks in, steals my TV and makes a copy of the game. I'm out $50 for the TV, but for the game I've lost... nothing. Perhaps a very small amount of value from potential resale value on the game, but nothing significant. Despite the thief having broken into my house the real economic damage is done to Best Buy and Sony. That's a heck of a trick, to have a thief break into my house, "steal" my copy of the game, but have third parties suffer financially.

        This is not to suggest that copyright infringement is "okay." Indeed, copyright infringement has a definite detrimental impact on society. But it's a different impact from theft. The steps to defend against these crimes are different.

          • To someone like me, it is EXACTLY the same as theft. ... Ok, this is less theft and more rape.

            I'd say it's less rape, less theft, and more like trespass to land. When someone steps onto your property, they aren't depriving you of the property, but they're using it without permission, which is sufficient for that offense. With copyright infringement, they're not depriving you of your copyright or of the creative work, but they are using the creative work without permission.

            Still, given that you backed down from saying that it was "EXACTLY the same as theft" in nearly the same breath, I don't know if you're really the right person to judge the situation objectively.

            Argue as much as you like, an illegal act is the same as another illegal act

            So you're saying that you think that we ought to execute people for jaywalking because jaywalking is the same as premeditated murder? I'm going to have to disagree with you there, and I think that pretty much everyone else in the world will too. One offense is not the same as another. Even Hammurabi knew this.

            The only muddying is coming from folks that want to distinguish two separate items into a group of tangible vs. intangible because the general public is still trapped into blue collar lifestyles and thus incapable of understanding the second.

            Actually, I want to distinguish between them because they are not the same, and it is unwise (as we've seen) to treat them identically. I want very much for people to understand the latter, and many of my posts here, including this one, are aimed at just this. It doesn't bother me if you think that copyright infringement should be illegal. Even I think it should be illegal (though we may differ on precisely what should constitute it). It does bother me if the reason you think that is because you don't understand the issues. I'd rather have people making informed decisions.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by cliffski (65094)
          I spend thousands of dollars a year on groceries. Am I entitled to steal the odd packet of biscuits? If the biscuits really *rock*, then I might buy some of them next time.
          It's ok right?

          Taking stuff you haven't paid for is morally wrong. you can call it what you like, it doesn't change the fact that its a dirty low-down thing to do.
          Most games have demos, there are reviews, previews and screenshots, movies of gameplay etc etc.
          And its not like its buying a house, its a thirty-fourty dollar PC game.
          People who

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by pilot1 (610480)
            I spend thousands of dollars a year on groceries. Am I entitled to steal the odd packet of biscuits? If the biscuits really *rock*, then I might buy some of them next time.
            It's ok right?

            Taking stuff you haven't paid for is morally wrong. you can call it what you like, it doesn't change the fact that its a dirty low-down thing to do.

            The difference being that when you steal a packet of biscuits, the store is now missing a packet of biscuits that could have been sold to someone else. When you copy elec
    • Yeah, ever since DOOM (the last of the classic-era id games), they sold out and became the very thing they hated...

      We need back the innovative company that brought you Commander Keen and Wolfenstein 3D because they pushed the state of the art at the time, not Quake fifty-million because they can make a quick buck.

      -uso.
      • Sorry, you need to extend that era through Quake 1, as it was nothing short of revolutionary. It introduced TCP/IP pick-up-and-play multiplayer and publisher-condoned modding, and singlehandedly created the market for hardware-accelerated 3D on the desktop.
  • ... but I can still pirate your game on the 360 and I'm sure it's only a matter of time before I can do the same with the PS3.

    • Re:Hate to break it to you Id... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by stratjakt (596332) on Monday March 12 2007, @01:21PM (#18319701) Journal
      It's not about dorks, it's about casual piracy. Anybody can download Quake 4 for th PC from piratebay and be playing. XBox 360 piracy involves modding your DVD firmware (and unless your console is old removing the epoxy from the firmware to do so), burning DL-DVDrs in just the right way, etc.

      Many people who own consoles don't even think of piracy, know it's possible, or care. They just want something they can turn on and play.
  • More and more of today's games, on all platforms, are being designed with online components. Microsofts's Live, Sony's Home, Blizzard's World of Warcraft, Linden Lab's Second Life, and even Wizard's of the Coast Magic: The Gathering Online all seem to be pointing towards the future of PC and Console entertainment.

    What happens when almost every game that comes out includes core design functionality that requires online play, and therefor, online registration?

    Does this put an end to piracy or are there some n

    • Re:Does Piracy Even Have a Future? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by faloi (738831) on Monday March 12 2007, @01:34PM (#18319953)
      Does this put an end to piracy or are there some new and clever forms that will emerge?

      Two words... Private servers.

      • Re:Does Piracy Even Have a Future? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) on Monday March 12 2007, @01:52PM (#18320315)

        Two words... Private servers.
        Any non-validating server that attains any level of popularity is going to (a) cost a lot to operate if for nothing else besides the bandwidth and (b) make an easy target for the copyright police. Small-scale server aren't likely to make a dent because it requires a certain level of expertise to even set one up that is probably beyond the average user's ability.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by dave562 (969951)
        Two words... Private servers.

        By playing on a private server you are missing out on a big portion of the game experience in an MMO type of game. I can only speak for WoW. One of my favorite parts of WoW is the world PVP aspect. World PvP works because there are hundreds of people logged into a server at any given time. Do private servers really have that much of an audience. What about battlegrounds? How are you going to do BGs if your server can't connect up to the legit ones?

  • Details? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) on Monday March 12 2007, @01:24PM (#18319779)
    Sounds like a bogus misquote of some sort.

    The game in question is, reportedly, multi-player. Which almost certainly means that it will be linked to servers under the publisher's control. Done correctly, no amount of crackz, warez, numberz, etc can defeat an online, real-time verification system.

    I think it is a lot more likely that they chose to develop for the consoles because, surprise there is a market there!

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by malsdavis (542216)
      I found it odd the article relates to a multi-player game also. Had it been about a single-player game then it would make a lot more sense.

      The order of most-pirated must be something like:
      1) single-player and old multi-pleyer PC games
      2) single-player console games
      3) modern multi-player PC & console games

      "modern multi-player PC & console games" is at the bottom of the list because, as you state, real-time multi-player portals are impossible to crack unless you can guess ones of the CD-Keys from a gam
  • WTF is wrong with marketers for producing this crappy advertising and WTF is wrong with web admins allowing this crap on their sites? 2 full motion adds? One right smack dab in the middle of the text, on repeat with a flashing animation.

    I'd love to have a meaningful debate about what ever the message was, but I gave up trying to read it after I couldn't successfully block out the advertising with my hand while trying to read the text.

    -Rick
    • Wow, I just revisted the site to see if I could get a less annoying add in the middle of the page. I did, but since my eyes were no longer bleeding while looking at the page I realized that there are accually 4 full motion adds on the page. And they are all still really annoying.

      -Rick
      • Crap, there's a 5th!

        Okay, animated banner at the top, ticker at the head of the page, image swapping adds when you cursor over the menu, animated vertical add on the right, flash add mid text, two smaller animated box adds on the left... did I miss any this time?

        -Rick
        • Perhaps the morale is, 'Don't RTFA'.

        • I can see the ticker and two animations, one of which stops when I hit Disable. Firefox + Adblock + Flashblock is highly effective, you should check it out.

  • Uh, maybe it's because Doom III sucked? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by RichPowers (998637) on Monday March 12 2007, @01:28PM (#18319849)
    Others have pointed to Doom III's sales number, something like 1.5 million units, as proof of how pirates ruined the bottom line. Only 1.5 million units for one of the most anticipated games of '04!?! Balderdash!

    Doom III was massively pirated, to be sure, but every pirate =/= a lost purchase. My theory is this: people pirated Doom III, realized it was complete and utter shit, and simply didn't buy it. That's what a certain person I know did...

    In any event, online games are a sure-fire way to combat piracy, and a reasonable one at that. ET: Quake Wars looks amazing and I'll buy it the day it comes out.

    But I can also pirate console games. It just takes a little more work.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by MarcoAtWork (28889)
      amen, I've bought all ID games from doom 1 up to and including quake 3, even way back when I was living in Europe I did the honorable thing and ordered them directly from ID, but after reading up on doom3 and playing it at a friends' house I was very underwhelmed and decided for the first time to give it a pass. I was SO looking forward to doom with an updated engine, but that's not what doom 3 is about at all (at least judging from the reviews and from my 2 hours or so playtest), the engine might be great,

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by p0tat03 (985078)

      I remember the big mess when Doom 3 came out. History has not looked upon Doom 3 kindly, but upon first release the game was touted as a graphical revolution with incredible twitch gameplay. The whole "duct-taped flashlight" joke didn't even kick in till weeks after the game's release.

      D3 is also a prime example of what piracy does to sales. The game was pirated far more than any other game before its time, there were torrents *everywhere*, and *everyone* had a copy. Anticipation was high, and when a warez

      • The game was pirated far more than any other game before its time, there were torrents *everywhere*, and *everyone* had a copy. Anticipation was high, and when a warez group let slip the ISO *days* before the retail date, sales were instantly decimated.

        I'm curious where your information comes from. Doom 3 lost 10% of its sales because of the early illegal release? How can you know what the number would have been without that release? It was pirated more than any other game previously? I wasn't aware that NPD was tracking those numbers. "Everyone" had a copy? Hyperbole just makes you look like you lack real evidence.

        Ultimately you're guessing. You have no more evidence that piracy caused fewer sales than expected than the grandparent post claiming that the game just sucked.

        Here are some actual numbers. You've suggested that "Piracy ruined Doom 3...." Doom 3 sold 3.5 million copies. [shacknews.com] Most publishers would love to sell 3.5 million copies of a game. Games generally considered to be highly successful, like Warcraft III [blizzard.co.uk] , Baldur's Gate [bioware.com] , and Unreal Tournament [gearboxsoftware.com] didn't sell 3.5 million copies. There are only perhaps a dozen or two PC games that can claim to have topped that. [wikipedia.org] id claimed Doom 3 was "...id's most successful game to date. [shacknews.com]" If that's ruination, I'm afraid of success. Assuming you claim of decimation is correct, we're talking about id losing about 350,000 sales. That is a huge number of sales; many PC games never sell that many. But really is the different between 3.5 and 3.85 million copies really ruination?

    • Um, they did have a this thing called a demo.....if doom 3 sucked that bad people wouldn't need to pirate it to realize how bad a game it was.
  • Does anyone remember way back when, while Quake was coming out, and the over-board success of Dooom2.

    If memory servers, John Carmack, Mr id., himself, once said 'that they are happy that there game is being pirated, because that means that so many people will want to play it. Eventually people will be happy to throw money our way'.

    That came true in so many ways.

    The whole foundation of their company is based on piracy.

    Crazy, crazy days.
    • Remember how back then character models/sprites had about 10 polys/pixels apiece, you could create a complete and polished level in a couple days, and you didn't have to spend million upon millions of dollars on art assets to make an A+ game?

      It's one thing when you're just supporting a dozen programmers or so on your game. When you're 20 million dollars in the red by the time the game sees the shelves, you can't take such a casual attitude towards lost sales.

    • Re:How Quickly They forget. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Svartalf (2997) on Monday March 12 2007, @02:13PM (#18320703) Homepage
      Heh... I look at Metallica and think the same thing...

      Doom3 not being as good as the hype they had on that game (Hell, they had all kinds of it
      being flung about at the two QuakeCons before release... You could've drowned in the
      hype it was that bad... But yet, the glimpses they handed us looked SO good, we all
      bought into it...) is the real reason it didn't sell as well as it could have, not piracy.
  • Is this really true? does anyone have good statistical data about how many games where sold in which year? Because i honestly cant believe, that the pc games industry is so broken. I guess they still sell many game. Maybe the competition is harder now.
    Dont you think they rather just target the console market, because more people can play (and buy) their games than?
    Maybe id has economic problems because they didnt have a real hit title recently? I mean some of their older games where groundbreaking but y
  • This doesn't make sense. My guess is that the discussion was taken out of context. Or maybe it is FUD.

    ...started to eye console platforms as a method to battle the financial loss piracy incurs.

    1) Expanding into consoles does nothing to stem piracy. If piracy was the cause, then they would stop making the PC version.
    2) Selling for console platforms is a method to make more money. Expanding your market is a good move regardless of the existance of piracy.

  • Dev Costs (Score:3, Insightful)

    by fozzmeister (160968) on Monday March 12 2007, @02:12PM (#18320683)
    I think its more a case of Dev costs spiraling out of control, and game costs being static. As for QuakeWars, surely without an online key the game is worthless, you'll always get cracks etc of course, but in that realm, those people are more demo'ing the game rather than wanting to spend serious time with it. If your spending 5-10hrs plus with a multi-player, net based game you'd have bought it.

  • Duuh. Works half the time. (Score:3, Funny)

    by Micklewhite (1031232) on Monday March 12 2007, @02:22PM (#18320887)
    I can totally understand id's anti-pirating system. See, Quake Wars is almost a carbon copy of Battlefield 2142. So by making a game exactly the same as an existing game people will get confused and accidentally pirate the wrong game. It's foolproof!

  • Little-Known Facts (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ewhac (5844) on Monday March 12 2007, @03:09PM (#18321669) Homepage Journal

    I don't know Mr. Hollenshead personally, so all I have to go on are his public remarks. And it seems every time I see his name in the press, he's bleating about how much money he's "losing" to unsanctioned copies all over the net.

    Let me clue in the business types at id Software on why they "lost" a sale to yours truly.

    Doom III was widely anticipated, yes. And it looked like it was going to be a visually amazing piece of work. However, it was also widely reported that, unless you had the absolutely latest and greatest PC hardware at the time, it was going to run very poorly. Well, at the time, I didn't have the latest and greatest PC hardware. All I had was a paltry dual-CPU Pentium-III running at 1GHz (and 100MHz memory bus) with 256MiB of RAM and a GeForce FX5900. It was apparent from the press that Doom III would run like crap on this rig. So I didn't buy it. I didn't buy Quake 4 for the same reason.

    It wasn't until last year that I finally bought a completely new machine (AMD Athlon X2 4400+, 2GiB RAM, GeForce 7900GT) which would run Doom III well. But after downloading the free demo and playing it, I decided against it. I just didn't find stumbling around in the dark to be terribly fun, and I'm not really into horror for its own sake.

    Quake 4, on the other hand, seemed like it might be fun. However, every time I visited the shelf at Fry's, it either A) wasn't there, or B) was priced at $40.00. So I waited. And waited. Eventually, Fry's started selling them for $20.00 a copy, and that's when I bought it.

    So there you have it: id Software "lost" money to me, but somehow it had nothing whatsoever to do with unsanctioned copying (imagine that!). The Executive Summary you should take away from this is, to make good sales, you should release games that are:

    1. reasonably priced, and,
    2. fun to play.

    The importance of point #1 cannot be overstated. If you hit #1, you can kind of fudge on #2. I've grabbed all the Serious Sam games, despite their uneven game play, because they're reasonably priced. OTOH, there's absolutely no way I'm going to buy a copy of "Sonic and the Secret Rings" for the XBox 360 until it drops from the preposterously stratospheric $60.00 they're charging for it.

    Schwab

  • Budgets and Sales (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ravyne (858869) on Monday March 12 2007, @03:42PM (#18322161)
    While pirating games on the PC is much more attainable than on the console (no modding required,) there is more to it than simple piracy.

    Probably the largest factor is that, today, console games are where the sales are at. A "hit" game on the PC might sell 250k copies, where on the console it would be at least a million. Of course, there are examples like WOW, that have become massive enterprises unto themselves, but for the run-of-the-mill AAA PC title those kinds of numbers are only a dream. The PC simply does not touch the consoles in terms of sales potential. Sure there are more PCs in the world, but how many of those are used primarily for gaming, or even gaming at all (excluding casual games, which we're not talking about.)

    As budgets for triple-A titles grow larger, you can only respond in so many ways without raising prices on the game itself: Opt to keep the budget small (lower development costs), increase your potential consumer base (more platforms), or charge for "extras" (expansions, subscriptions, micro-transactions.)

    In the end it's all business and a simple investment-benefit calculation: They believe that targeting consoles will bring in more money than what the additional work will cost them. As game budgets continue to grow, while simultaneously tipping more and more towards the cost of developing the artistic assets and the code behind the game makes up less and less, it only makes sense to hit as many targets as possible if the art assets can be shared with minimal or no tweaking, even to the point that it will make sense even if little of the code is shared between platforms -- which we'll see more and more of with the architectural differences between the 360, PS3, Wii and PC.
    • And before that they were responsible for the great Commander Keen and Wolfenstein 3D games, great shareware games.
      • I loved Commander Keen. I wish they would do something with that franchise. Its lighthearted storyline was just a lot of fun. Don't we have enough FPSes? Jeeze.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Mizled (1000175)

      Online games, if you require authentication then there is a reason to purchase the game.

      Maybe, but this presents a problem in its self. What of the people that don't have an internet connection or have such a slow connection that this one be a hassle (example: dial-up)? Not everyone is on broadband and always connected and online. What if I wanted to play my Wii in my car on an LCD? Or at Grandma's house who doesn't know what the internet is? Or at a friends house who lives so far out in town can't get a

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.