Stardock Evaluates DRM Complaints, Updates Gamer's Bill of Rights 279
Earlier this year, we discussed the Gamer's Bill of Rights, a document put forth by Stardock CEO Brad Wardell to address what he felt were the unacceptable characteristics of the gaming industry. ShackNews reports that Wardell has taken feedback from gamers, developers, and publishers, and updated the document accordingly. One particular area on which he focused was DRM. Stardock also published a customer report that examines the issue in greater detail (PDF). MTV's Multiplayer Blog fans the flames of the debate by asking if anyone is embarrassed about pirating video games.
Re:Embarrassed? (Score:5, Interesting)
Honestly, I'd be embarrassed to admit I'd bought a copy of Spore considering the limitations of the DRM and the fact that it's installed malware like SecureRom. The people who have torrented DRM-free copies are already laughing at the people who have already hit their 5-install limit.
Just like I'd be embarrassed if I had bought music from Microsoft or Yahoo a few years ago, then found out that they're shutting down the license servers so that I have no way of listening to copies of songs I've purchased. People who listen to copies of those same songs downloaded from Kazaa are laughing at them.
Pay attention to the lesson here folks. If you buy something that comes with copy protection, you are being scammed just as surely as if you were to send your life savings to the nice man from Nigeria that sends you so many emails. If there is no legitimate method of buying it that doesn't include DRM, then don't buy it at all.
Their stuff sounds worse than DRM (Score:3, Interesting)
Their games require you to run "Impulse", and the "Impulse Dock", which is a browser-like client that only talks to Stardock. It has blogs, downloads, and such, and is required for updates to their games. It's like one of those background services required to run many games, only it's in your face.
This is progress?
Re:Embarrassed? (Score:3, Interesting)
Piracy adversely affects the PC Game industry by providing a disincentive to publishers to publish on the PC platform, and indirectly affects the lives of game company employees whose companies receive lower revenues due to pirated copies
As you said yourself: no substantial data exists. If you believe that you're getting paid less because of piracy then it may just be because your employer wants you to believe that. An employer who doesn't pay you what your worth? That's unheard of. And, no disrepect, but to even guess that "30-40% of pirated copies are lost sales" is just that... a guess. My personal guess would be about 1%. So, who's right?
Re:I am embarassed! at the mtv article (Score:3, Interesting)
I like the tipping system here.
I've been at restaurants where waitresses invade my personal space by touching me or rubbing on me while handing other diners their food, and I just refuse to tip them because of that. Usually they do it because they think it gets them more tips if they make me want to have sex with them. That kind of manipulation really pisses me off. Remember that this is an example of why I like the tipping system.
Another reason why I like the system here is that if I really like the service someone gave me, I can say so by giving them a larger than average tip.
Re:I am embarassed! at the mtv article (Score:4, Interesting)
No, being a decent waiter is the waiter's job, and they don't deserve any extra for doing what they're supposed to do. If they don't earn enough then they should go and demand more from their employer.
A tip is not a tip if it's mandatory. A tip is used to reward exceptional service. Simply serving food or mechanically pouring a beer or cup of coffee is not exceptional service. Now, when a taxi driver spent a while figuring out how to fit the large CRT I had bought into the car and helped me carry it up, that was very exceptional service and appropiately rewarded.
Re:Embarrassed? (Score:4, Interesting)
Without getting into the absolute nonsense of industry piracy figures (I mean I'd be counted in the figures for pirating Spore, except I bought it as well. I just wanted the crack to avoid the DRM.) Piracy currently offers a more attractive product. I've read LOADS of people having problems with Spore when used from the legit copy. Not ONE problem with the cracked version.
Sure, I can understand developers wanting to protect their titles, but it has to be transparent, and it seems with each passing phase of software protection, more and more people are being screwed out of playing the game they've bought due to the DRM. And of course the pathetic irony is you can't return the game, "because you may have pirated it".
I started using cracks regularly when Neverwinter Nights wouldn't load for after a certain patch. (1.27 I think. Maybe 1.29.) That was where I basically said "Enough" and have cracked every piece of software I've bought since. (Except in the case of Stardock and the like who don't use DRM.)
It really is at the point though where I'm about done with the PC gaming industry. And I have no interest in the consoles, so mainstream PC gaming is pretty much "game over" for me now. Endless lack of imagination, endless expansion packs, endless DRM... It's just not worth it anymore.
Re:Embarrassed? (Score:4, Interesting)
My rule:
If it piques my interest (and most games dont), I'll go get a pirate friendly copy.
If reviews indicate that you infest DRM or other anti-user techniques in the software, I will NOT buy. I will instead spread the pirate copies that are fixed versions.
If I can ruin your business by reducing the money you will make, you MIGHT get the idea. If you dont, too bad. Not my problem.
If you respect the user in the regular copies, I'll make sure that others know about it and encourage them to buy. I'll most likely buy when I get the chance... if it's in reasonable grasp (box stores, your website with a CC) and a good game. Some times, what I think might be a god game, just isn't. They get deleted.
The key here: crackers and piraters here will not stop at anything to "do a challenge". You cannot defeat them. Instead, you can rally support by treating your paying customers honorably and respectfully. Many companies think that since they pay, they deserve crap treatment. Instead, the pirate copy users have less crashes due to drm and overall better user experience.
I've been burnt by crippleware that I couldnt return, nor could I play. I see no reason other than to download and try ON MY TERMS, as your industry has forced that upon us. And once I have the better quality pirate copy, why even buy?
Re:I am embarassed! at the mtv article (Score:4, Interesting)
How about a DRM Bill of Rights (Score:5, Interesting)
1) Right of Free Use: If you limit number of installations, the publisher MUST provide a "revoke" tool.
What it entails for the publisher:
The Publisher is allowed to limit the software's installation to one or more computers based on their hardware configuration and registered online ("Activation"). They must provide a free stand-alone tool, preferably on the same distribution medium, that the User can use to de-authorize previously activated computers. The total number of Activations and De-activations must be unlimited in number, but can be limited as to number of uses in a particular time period.
How It Would Work:
When you install a game, the software must be activated online as is the standard practice today. However, what this Right provides is a method for the User to de-activate an installation so the software can be transferred to another computer, either due to hardware failure, upgrade or resale. This tool needs to be provided free to the user, preferably on the CD/DVD with the game (or downloaded if the game is purchased through digital distribution) and must be stand-alone. De-activation would require proof of ownership (the CD in the drive and the CD-key should be enough), and would display a list of all computers authorized to run that software. The User could then select the computers to be de-activated. Note that this tool does NOT have to be run on the Authorized computer, or require the Authorized software to be installed. In order to prevent misuse of this tool, the Publisher can allow only a certain amount of Authorizations/DeAuthorizations per day/week/month, but cannot limit the TOTAL amount of de-Authorizations.
2) Right of Activation: If the publisher requires Activation, they must provide some assurance of method to bypass this should the method of Activation no longer be available.
What it entails for the Publisher:
The Publisher is allowed to require the User to Activate their software through the method of their choice. But if that method should no longer be available (be it due to technical or financial reasons), they must ensure that the user can continue to use the software they paid for even though the Activation service is no longer running. This assurance can take many forms; a legal promise to release a patch should the Activation Servers be taken down and a waiving of rights to take legal action of any third-party who rights software to allow the same, or a universal "key" that is held in escrow, to be released only should the Activation servers go down, that allows installation and use of the Software without Activation.
How It Would Work:
Basically, the Publisher needs to provide the User with a "back-door" that can bypass the Activation requirement should they chose to no longer allow Activations, either because it is costing them too much money or they are no longer in business. The best way for the User is if the Publisher has a patch or some sort of universal serial number that allows the User to bypass Activation; this patch/key is held in escrow until the Activation Servers go down and is then released to the general public. Of course, this may dramatically compromise the usefulness of the DRM, so other methods can be used, for example: providing source-code and funds that can be released to pay a programming team to successfully develop a patch after the fact. Alternately (but least palatable to the User) the Publisher can simply promise to release code and not prosecute should a third-party (e.g., a "cracker") want to develop some method to bypass the Activation (but, note, they must provide enough code to make this a possibility)
3) Right to P
Re:Embarrassed? (Score:3, Interesting)
When an game is sold $60, it is sold here in Europe for 60 Euro.
Or in the UK for £60 = 70eur = $120 :(
Re:So... (Score:3, Interesting)
I've got no funds, and I'm targetting Mac OS X and Windows initially, and maybe XBLA/WiiWare later. The first step is choosing a multiplatform framework (I'm using Playfirst's Playground SDK [playfirst.com]) or even a cross-platform library to develop your own framework (like SDL [libsdl.org], OpenGL [opengl.org] and OpenAL [creativelabs.com] as appropriate).
Limiting yourself to one platform limits your potential customers. If you start with multiplatform at the beginning of development, it doesn't take much more time/effort (look how Blizzard works, they ship Mac and Windows binaries on the same disc).
There are other advantages to working multiplatform, too. Different compilers flag different errors and warnings, reducing your post-release support costs (for code bugs, at least). Different platform behaviours and expectations will point out UI and game play issues earlier. You've always got at least one current-ish backup of your code/assets on your "other" platform. ;-)
But, for the love of gaming, if you're not going to work multiplatform, don't make it impossible for third-party porting houses to do the work for you. And I'm not talking about your code here, I'm talking about wanting piles of cash up-front to "let" the third parties do the porting for you, or simply ignoring them.
Re:pride shame (Score:3, Interesting)
The game crashed, what makes you assume it was the DRM?
The game was stable up until the space stage, then it started crashing on me and caused me to lose many hours of progress. Buried in the crash logs was mention of a particular dll. I went searching for an explanation of what that file was for. Turns out, there was already an article written that explained that dll, SecureROM, and its relation to Spore. http://www.arsgeek.com/2008/09/09/how-to-remove-securom-spore-dasmx86dll-issues-and-some-great-drm-free-alternatives/ [arsgeek.com]
Re:Embarrassed? (Score:1, Interesting)
The problem isn't copyright protection in general, but rather, the methods that companies are now using to implement it. Companies do have a right to protect their content.
However, many companies now seem to believe that this right supersedes the end users rights to maintain and control their systems. Some people don't like rootkits. Some people also like to reinstall their systems fairly often to maintain a clean build. My personal thoughts are, if a problem or inefficiency requires more than a few hours of maintenance then it makes more sense to reinstall as I can get it done in less time. That said, I've only reinstall my system once (cleanup) in the past two years as I've yet to run into any major issues.
These types of companies also believe their rights supersede that of the end user to use the content that they've purchased. As mentioned above, when it is no longer profitable for these companies to maintain their servers, they shut them down and leave then end user high and dry. I tend to agree with the view point in the article that $50 doesn't buy you ownership of a $5 million dollar title. However, what it does buy is a nonexclusive, non-expiring license to use the content. With software, any restrictions to the use of the software should be clearly specified on the box.
Note: The EULs that these companies write up are not only ridiculously (and unnecessarily) complicated, but you don't get to read them until after you purchase the content. If you disagree with their license, you're out of luck as standard retailers will not refund an opened piece of software.
All this said, any protection scheme that makes you rely on an outside source to use your content should send up red flags. Some people don't care that they don't control of their computer, though they probably didn't really have control over their computer to begin with. Some people don't mind that they may not be able to use their content in the future. In my opinion, truly good content is still enjoyable after the newness wears off. (I still occasionally pull out older games like XCOM UFO defense, Wing Commander, Deus Ex, Final Fantasy 7, and other classics) Well written software may not contain the latest features, but is no less effective at what it does than when you first bought it. Finally, good music can last beyond lifetimes. Imagine if nobody could listen to music of Bach, Beethoven, and Mozart a few years after they were written. We would have never progressed beyond chants. Ironically their music is still around today.
In regards to jobs relating to PC gaming, I know several people who have lost their job due to "piracy". It's ironic that in none of the situations did the CEO forgo his annual bonus (usually more than enough to cover the salaries of those dismissed). Further, with the economic struggles, shouldn't these companies expect lower sales. Finally, much of the actual piracy occurs in areas that the game isn't marketed in. If the company doesn't release a version of the game for a particular market, then they should also disregard piracy in the respective markets.
It seems to me that the actual effect of piracy, is probably misunderstood (especially in the game industry). Their are theories that it can even help games sales by virtue of exposure. In some industries, free samples are given out to get the product more exposure. Consequentially, if the product is good, sales of the said product go up. However, if the product is not good, this can hurt sales. It is conceivable that the same type of thing is happening in the game industry (only the samples aren't of the give away variety).
The affect of certain copyright protection schemes is definitely misunderstood. Proof of this is in the fact that it is harder to find an unbroken protection scheme than an unbroken one. (Don't even bother with the probability that the scheme will remain unbroken) It is reasonable to assume that nearly any title can be found free of charge/DRM given enough time. Now, the problem
Re:Embarrassed? (Score:3, Interesting)
My PlayStation (original) games have DRM, have worked for over a decade and I have no reason to expect they won't continue to work for as long as my hardware holds out. Not all DRM is bad. For dedicated gaming platforms (where you're never going to have the need to use the media on a different device) DRM is a good thing as a locked-down platform makes cheating drastically harder. I wouldn't even want to play a game on-line without a platform with strong DRM. I gave up on PC gaming because of the cheaters. I've never seen anything other than an occasional lag switch and the odd glitch on the PS3.
For music and movies, DRM is a bad idea because you want to be able to play the media on different devices and transcode to different formats just to make use of it. Games? Not so much. You may want to play it on a different Windows PC, but it'll still be a Windows PC - you're not going to "transcode" it to the PS3 as you might transcode FLAC to MP3. The main reason DRM on the PC is so obnoxious is that to do DRM on an open platform you have to do pretty obnoxious things. If Windows and PCs had hardware support for DRM it wouldn't "have to" (in the eyes of the publisher) be nearly so obnoxious. Console games don't have a 5-install limit or activation, yet they're all DRM-ed up the wazoo. Inserting the original media (and it being a single point of failure) is the full extent of the DRM hassles for non-PC gamers.