Users who Dugg This
DIGG-WillNotFixMy-STATISTICS
12264 Followers
DIGG-WillNotFixMy-STATISTICS
12264 Followers
Slum Dog Millionaire
4156 Followers
Slum Dog Millionaire
4156 Followers
Financial Highway
1566 Followers
bengringoAug 12, 2010
I never understood DRM still being around when we have services like Steam. Its the best your going to do about stopping piracy. I imagine most people who pirate are most likely in the situation that doesn't allow them to afford all those games. Company A's game may be the one they would actually buy or it may be Company B's. Either way one copy isn't being payed for. Im not saying stealing is ok but if people want something bad enough and don't have the means to get it, There going to steal it if a safe enough way comes along. Your best bet is to just put it up on a online service and hope that it will at least get the 'convenience' pirates. DRM just pisses off paying costumers into convincing others not to pay for it.
kingmanicAug 12, 2010
Steam DRM's their software it's just very convenient DRM.
So does itunes and all console games except the dream cast, first gen NES and 3DO.
nmanguyAug 12, 2010
Exactly. Steam "technically" has the DRM of having to be connected to the internet ONCE when you install the game, and that's pretty much it. If you connect again, you can get updates, friends, etc, but you don't have to. You can be in offline mode forever. Considering more people find Steam's features useful, they tend to keep opening and running it again.
stagleAug 12, 2010
I love steam especially the steam sales I've bought over a dozen games that i had already pirated because they were so cheap and i dunno i kinda felt good paying for them i guess.
atarioAug 13, 2010
However, from what I've read, offline mode is problematic at best. That, and the fact that they can alter your software at will.
dsmxAug 12, 2010
Don't look at steam as DRM look at it as the best way of distributing, updating games and communicating with friends (and yes xbox fanboys it does do everything xbox live does without you having to pay for it) out there.
rahazAug 12, 2010
DRM is DRM dsmx. You and the rest of digg's love for stream doesn't change that.
However it is more acceptable DRM than most out there and that is why it isn't a problem.
fallout22Aug 12, 2010
Steam*
Stop insulting my precious.
robbh66Aug 12, 2010
DRM might be DRM, but not all DRM is created equal.
I pretty much only buy games on Steam now (and usually at a great discount). The games (depending on the compatibility) work on both OS X and Windows, and I never have to find my disc or the frigging manual with the CD key on it. I simply reinstall my OS and reconnect to steam and everything is gravy after that.
In short- I've NEVER had an issue with it- so I don't mind it.
jb4062Aug 12, 2010
It's not that 1 download = 1 sale, but lets say for example 10% of those who illegally download a game would have bought it instead. This isn't that dramatic of a number and isn't really that far fetched. In fact I think it's on the very low side depending on the game.
If these stats from this article are true and 50-90% of all use of a game are downloads then that's still 5-9% increased sales which as anyone in the sales world will tell you is a huge increase especially in a down economy.
Piracy might not exactly amount to a 100% conversion to sales, but it certainly will amount to some increased sales and I would immediately doubt any study that says the opposite because it doesn't make any sense for it not to.
There are undoubtedly some people who download games that would buy them if they couldn't get them.
croquemitaineAug 12, 2010
A lot of companies are studying the affect of piracy on their bottom line. They all focus on how many sales were lost to illegal downlaods.
I have puchased 3 games after having downloaded them of a torrent. I would probably have not bought them if i didnt have the chance to full try it out before hand.
Have game studio ever studied this positif effect of people pirating their games. I know im not the only one that bought a game after pirating it.
It seems to me that this would be a hard thing to measure effectivly but it's definitly something games companies should be looking into.
chaosblade77Aug 12, 2010
I can't name a single game I've downloaded and played more for than an hour or so without buying it, apart from a few special exceptions.
Most of those exceptions are Japanese games that could be localized, but aren't. I don't see why I should support a company that basically says "I don't want your money." The case would probably be different if it was a super-niche game that had licensing issues or just couldn't get localized for some reason, but I haven't had that come up yet. Also, torrenting ISOs of discs that get scratched one way or another, but I'm not sure if that really counts in this discussion.
Back on track, if I download a game, 95%+ of the time I'm using it as a glorified demo.
mxm111Aug 12, 2010
I actually dislike STEAM DRM for the fact that it forces me to run it each time when I want to lunch game. DRM in almost all other distrubuting programs do not have this restriction. My preference is Impulse - one of the least obtrusive form of DRM.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
djb28Aug 13, 2010
Probably 80% - 90% of my recent game purchases have been through Steam, thought I agree with you in preferring Impulse.
The problem is that Impulse simply does not yet have the huge catalog that Steam has, and Impulse's sales just aren't as enticing to me yet.
I like Steam, but I look forward to buying more of my games through Impulse in the future.
reedatschoolAug 12, 2010
Lets say for example that 60% of people who pirate games have friends who play them and then buy them. This piracy then increases sales by over 20%. Now wouldn't make sense not to use DRM so more people would be likely to pirate and thus introduce far more people to a game who are willing to pay for it?
We could circle around and around because in essence your post is nothing more than made up statistics and premises just like mine.
Until you have one shred of verifiable proof that preventing piracy actually increases sales then you need to stop pretending that a made up rhetoric is anything more than that. DRM is just another way for companies to sell a useless product while touting it as something that magically adds value to software.
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
pigfisterAug 12, 2010
steam sucks as they are equally responsible for destroying the second hand market by blocking you from reselling titles & your account.
through steam now they are even blocking open source mods for games so they can charge for them, [s] isnt that fantastic DRM in action there. [/s]Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
darkwater37Aug 12, 2010
I save pictures, save program files, videos, demo games and other junk off the internet and far more often than not I never look at them again, and if I had to pay for any of it I wouldn't even try to save anything. DRM seems such a waste of resources for the companies
shadowspawnAug 12, 2010
I buy games. I also break CD's and DVD's from time to time, and I get pissed, so I download iso's and no-cd patches without thinking twice because I own them. Hell I put the burns in the original cases along with the original scratched ones. Steam is a good solution for people like me but if you need internet to play coop on a lan, that sucks donkey balls.
visionviperAug 12, 2010
It's funny you bring up World of Goo as your example because I too pirated the full game to get a better idea of how it was to play. I was unconvinced that it could keep me interested to be worth it, so I pirated it. I played through about half of the game and decided that it was indeed worth the money. A couple month later it went on sale on Steam and I bought it without hesitation.
lord1lokiAug 12, 2010
The problem with their methodology in determining the rate of piracy is that it assumes everyone playing has a static IP address, and therefor would only ever submit a score from one IP address.
EPIC FAIL!
electricketchupAug 12, 2010
So true. Even with Static addresses, it doesn't count people who move their computers. I installed it on my laptop while I was on a trip in Singapore. Then I played in the airport in Tokyo on the way home. Then at work, and at home. So, I guess they have at least 4 different IP addresses for me, and I bought the game.
robbh66Aug 12, 2010
"I also break CD's and DVD's from time to time,"
Seriously- HTF do you really manage to do that? I've broken maybe one CD/DVD in my life that I didn't mean to break. Hell, my friend's Evanescence DVD I threw off the 12th floor of his building didn't even break.
chaosblade77Aug 12, 2010
When other people in your house don't care about your property and leave your games sitting out, and they fall behind desks, or get used as a GODDAMN COASTER.
I'm so glad I don't have that problem anymore.
trdrstvAug 13, 2010
"Seriously- HTF do you really manage to do that?"
I take it you don't have kids. Trust me a toddler can and will find a way... EVERY DAMN TIME.
It pays to backup your DVDs (and lock away the originals) so you can press more of them, when the inevitable happens.
firex726Aug 12, 2010
On the other hand with demos, many times they are the most polished and stable aspects of games, and very often do not give a good idea of the overall game. I have been burned many times by demos thinking it was great and find out that it was a only one special* level and nothing like the overall game.
*Special as in underwater or driving levels.
nevariusAug 12, 2010
My personal favorite is that the demo works just fine, but the full game runs like a drunk quadriplegic stuck in a ball pit.
esc27Aug 13, 2010
The World of Goo demo was an entire chapter (out of five.) 20% of a game is more than enough to evaluate.
trdrstvAug 13, 2010
"and no-cd patches without thinking twice because I own them."
Oh Definitely. I'm using an EeePC and no-cd cracks are pretty much necessary. I DO buy the game, and use an external dvd drive to install them, but immediately look for a no-cd crack so I can actually play it while traveling.
aubieguy333Aug 12, 2010
December 2008? Glad we're linking current articles on the front page.
On another note, DRM is retarded,
lazymojoAug 12, 2010
It's kind of fascinating to see that the DRM "debate" is unchanged from two years ago. We really haven't made any progress.
Closed AccountAug 13, 2010
2 years? Try 20... we were cracking the DRM on floppies* way back in the day... bit crackers, parameter disks, etc. I remember some guys would put really cool graphic/sound front-ends on the games they cracked. I don't know... do they still do that today?
* oh yeah, for you youngin's, a floppy disk was square, about the size of a CD case, but was, well, floppy like an envelope, with a flexible magnetic ring inside that spun. I think each one held 360k... on a side. Dammit, get off my lawn...
koddoAug 12, 2010
I'm waiting for the end of this comment. The beginning was good, I'm excited to see what's after this comma.
aubieguy333Aug 12, 2010
I already replied to this once, but I'm not seeing it after 15 minutes, so I will repost. Apologies if I end up double posting.
Nice catch, haha. I was going to say something more, thought better of it and deleted it and forgot to replace the comma. Now I can't remember what I was going to say, so I'll just make something up.
On another note, DRM is retarded, and f**k THE RIAA.
koddoAug 12, 2010
Oh man...your comment is already very popular, can you imagine if you had added f**k THE RIAA at the end of it?
purepremiumpulpAug 13, 2010
I'm so 2000 and 8
you're so 2000 and late
cam07dsAug 12, 2010
Wow posting from 2008 just a little dated there dont you think......
shwaavayAug 12, 2010
Get this 2 year old crap off my Digg.
downneckAug 12, 2010
elderly article is elderly
aubieguy333Aug 12, 2010
"It is wrong to assume that anyone who pirates a game is someone who would want to pay for it."
I'll be buying Portal 2 for the sole reason that I was able to download Portal legally for free. I loved Portal, but until I played it I was very skeptical and never would have bought it, regardless of great reviews.
There are many games I bought that I never would have had I not downloaded them to try first. Same goes for music, movies, etc. I pay for quality products, and I prefer to know what I'm getting before I shell out $15 to $60.
pvaibhavAug 12, 2010
Sadly the same is not true for headphones :-(
sabinAug 12, 2010
You're shopping at the wrong places then. The place I get my cans (Bay Bloor Radio in Toronto) has a wall of headphones that you can walk up to and try on. If not for them I would may have bought a pair of AKGs (don't like their sound even at their top end, personal preference so don't bother trying to convince me otherwise) instead of a pair of Grados. Top notch store.
Beep111Aug 12, 2010
The industry is losing cash because its a corrupt self serving way of doing business. Now that there's another option other than the large companies that have a death grip on the industry, people are realizing they can get their music without having to sell their soul to a multinational music corporation. It's not like the artists see any of that cash. It's used to fund new yachts for fat cats and large legal teams to sue people. If they stopped spending so much on litigation and actually made some improvements to their core business, they wouldn't be in such a bind.
They're trying to preserve the monopoly they once had, and it's just not going to happen.
If I like an artists I go to their show and buy their merch. If I want to hear their music I download their album, then go to their show. Downloading music only hurts the huge labels that reap huge profits. Of course they want you to believe that you're hurting artists, but anyone in the industry knows thats a load of s**t.
rocketdog7Aug 12, 2010
I'm all for cutting corporate music down to size, but people aren't always supporting even the independent artists they enjoy. when looking at data from features like 'scrobbling' on last.fm it's not hard to see as an artist that there are more people downloading illegally and repeatedly listening to your material than are paying to download it. I would assume if they listen to it repeatedly that they enjoy it. this is only comparing total paid downloads (from all stores) to a fraction of listeners using the scrobbling feature on one site. this paints a bleak picture for independent artists wanting to break even on a record even if they record it in there livingroom. many new artists are trying to embrace the concept of 'free music' by offering some albums as free downloads and chalking it up to advertisement and that has it's merits. bottom line is support the artists you like instead of just saying you do or lose a whole generation of talented musicians.
slvrbullet87Aug 13, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
james84Aug 12, 2010
TLDR:
Pirated copies != lost sales. Why? The demand curve (aka Econ 101 aka people like free stuff). If 90 people are willing to take a freebie but only 10 are willing to pay for a product, eliminating freebies will not increase sales, because most of the 90 people weren't willing to pay in the first place.
Guess what will increase sales? LOWERING THE PRICE (look at Steam sales, a 70% decrease in price resulted in a 1470% increase in profit). Link: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2009/08/software-pricing-are-we-doing-it-wrong.html
Closed AccountAug 12, 2010
"If 90 people are willing to take a freebie but only 10 are willing to pay for a product, eliminating freebies will not increase sales, because most of the 90 people weren't willing to pay in the first place. They just won't acquire a copy period. "
There's a difference between voluntarily offering freebies and someone deciding they'll have a copy of your work without paying you the price you are asking for.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
inactiveuserAug 12, 2010
No no, its like this.
If I really wanted a vesper with a hot brunet on the back for a day I could buy it.
Since I don't have enough money to waste on vespers with hot brunets every day I spend in on other things like food and rent, you know really important stuff..
If I can download a vesper with a hot brunet on the back I will, every day and google for the blond in the BMW as well. Since reality is often s**t and life means I can't do that for real I will just have to settle with copying the porn version instead. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountAug 12, 2010
No, it doesn't make sense.
Why should you get something for nothing because you've decided that you can't afford it.
If you disagree with the price something costs, what is so wrong with not buying it AND not obtaining it illegally?
That's the best way to stick two fingers up to the copyright holders - piracy just makes them add more DRM or do bulls**t legal cases using companies to spy on torrents and report those found to be downloading.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
kinggeoffAug 12, 2010
ohreilly
And with that in mind, who will win this battle as long as both sides refuse to change? All DRM can be broken, why not put more resources into increasing the value of the game. Why not try to be the game company that bucks the constrictive trends other companies are setting (which obviously do not resonate well with gamers) and end up as that game company that gamers respect, and would be more willing to give their money to.
Companies need to recognize a losing battle and stop pouring valuable resources into it.
tigersfan12Aug 13, 2010
Oh yes, giving money to the same companies that add such restrictive DRM is how gamers will win. That makes perfect sense.
Well, it makes perfect sense in that it goes against all conventional wisdom. You do not give incentives to a company to continue a bad behavior. You do not reward a company when it has done something that hurts it's costumers. You punish it. In this case, that punishment is not buying their product.
Now in most cases I say buy the game used, as that makes most sense. If you buy a used game, the company selling the product gets the revenue, not the publisher. However, PC companies have made this method very hard to accomplish because they've virtually whipped out the used PC game market with CD keys, install limits & DRM.
In that case, I say it's simple. Only buy from companies that you feel deserve the money. For me, it's Bioware, (Publisher EA, but still they know for which games the money is coming for).
james84Aug 12, 2010
The difference isn't material to the point I was making.
Closed AccountAug 12, 2010
Lowering the price would not work for me. It depends on how much crap the game needs. Example of GTA 4:
- Securom. OK games had this for a while, to authenticate the disk at start and that's it.
- Activation
- Requiring Rockstar Games Social Club
- Requiring something called XLive
slvrbullet87Aug 13, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
farkel715Aug 13, 2010
but if they lower the price they wont make any money!!!!!
/s
furatailAug 12, 2010
I don't pirate games but I also rarely waste my money on them anymore. I don't want to be stuck with a crappy game I cannot resale. I want more trials. I'm much more willing to purchase a game if I can try it free first.
slvrbullet87Aug 13, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
rolfAug 12, 2010
In reality, DRM does help a little. I wanted three books. 1 ebook was available online for free so I just read it there although it wasn't entirely legit. The other two weren't available online, so I bought and paid for them. It helped that they were only $10 each, and not $100. The ebook was $40. If it were cheaper, I might have gotten it from the source, or I might not.
People naturally want to make the most use of the money the have. If they can get a game, book, free, they will, and use the money saved toward something else. It's not entirely fair, as it takes time/effort/money to create things but people are naturally selfish. They'll also manufacture all type of excuses as to what situations they would have paid for something and rationalize/justify why they downloaded something for free instead so I don't really listen to that blather. People want s**t for free, no shockers there, it doesn't require a doctoral thesis to explain it.
When I really hate DRM, it's because it restricts me as a paying customer when the pirates have more freedom, or even just the people who bought it on another, more physical medium. Imo, the key to minimizing piracy is to keep the price in a sweet spot and to go after uploaders. This won't be a popular opinion, but it's true, because the convenience you can get at something for free puts a downward pressure on what the legimate author can charge.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
tinzusaAug 12, 2010
Companies use piracy as a smokescreen for using DRM to limit customer rights. They want games to become more consumable, have a short shelf life and be broken into packages, each of which has it own unit cost. Furthermore, they want to tap into consumer habits and utilize the information harvested from consumer machines to fine tune their service delivery.
Above all, companies that use DRM are lying if they say it combats piracy.
xmidoAug 12, 2010
buried, article is over 2 years old
Closed AccountAug 12, 2010
Still relevant.
deathcaptAug 12, 2010
Steam is win,
Everything else is obsolete.
I can't stress this enough.
v3rtex7740Aug 12, 2010
until steam gets rid of offline mode, or they change anything
dtfinchAug 12, 2010
I thought they already did. It's still in the interface, but it's fake. It still has to log in to their servers, which always seems to take 30 seconds or more.
deathcaptAug 12, 2010
In terms of DRM, Steam or similar rights management service is the only acceptable option. Anything else offers bulls**t with no gain.
omgwtflawlAug 12, 2010
There were plenty of hair-brained copy-protection schemes in the Bad Old Days when dinosaurs walked the earth. M1 Abrams Tank, for instance, would display a tank profile (say, a T-72) and ask for something likes its length or whatever. It asked three questions, but only the third question mattered for some reason. If you got it wrong, it kicked you out and you had to start the whole process over.
Castles II, another games I played that sort of looked like an 8-bit version of a Total War game, sometimes had a person entering your throne room claiming you were an impostor. You then had to look up a specific word on a specific paragraph in the user manual. Get it wrong and your whole game was over. I think it even hosed your save files.
Closed AccountAug 12, 2010
i had several games that asked manual specific questions. it really sucked back in the day when you lost it.
tntbassAug 12, 2010
I remember playing an old dungeons and dragons game (I can't remember the name), but every time you launched it, you had to have this wheel and the manual available. Look up a couple symbols on the wheel and it would tell you which word in the manual was needed, which you then required to enter before you could play the game.
gurumeditAug 12, 2010
You suddenly reminded me of one space game I used to have for the Amiga 500. I purchased it and had already discarded the bulky box it was in keeping only the manual and disk only to load it up and discovered that I needed the DAMN BOX to tell the stupid game questions like what color the soil was and crap to unlock the game. Well by the time I realized I needed it, the box was long gone with the rest of the trash.
After that I held onto my game boxes very closely.
omgwtflawlAug 12, 2010
If I did that it would probably lead to a rather awkward trip to the game store..."erm sir can I photocopy this box...".
Seriously, though, I wonder why we regarded boxes as disposable at that time. Fast forward to the mid 90s and you can't throw the things away, I have huge storage crates full of the things now. But back then you always just threw them out like you would the packaging of a toy car.
packetpaulAug 12, 2010
The mechanism the World of Goo publisher used to determine piracy is flawed. IP addresses can change as a PC is moved. I purchased World of Goo and have played it in numerous hotels, airports, etc.(easy game to play on a laptop when you have a few minutes). Thus there are numerous IP addresses in the database for my legitimately purchased copy of World of Goo.
elcadAug 12, 2010
I bought World of Goo, but still preferred to use the portable no-installation version.
fenarisAug 12, 2010
I actively avoid EA and Ubisoft software specifically because of the Draconian DRM they use. I also tell everyone that talks about games about it.
I will cost them more money from legit lost sales than pirates will ever cost them.
hantuduppyAug 12, 2010
I've never pirated a game to avoid paying for it
but
I HAVE refused to buy a game due to DRM.
inactiveuserAug 12, 2010
Ditto..
joshreflekAug 13, 2010
i have, and will pirate.
if the game kicks ass, ill pay for a legit copy, as long as its not from ubisoft ea or anyone else who has stupid DRM.
steam is fine, everyone else needs to get a clue.
also, there is nothing wrong with piracy, as long as you pay the authors for their work WHEN IT MERITS IT.
otherwise, i dont even see the need for a rental fee, mainly because i value my time more highly than their rental fee, ergo, they only deserve my money when the game is awesome.
non00bAug 12, 2010
World of goo is 10$.
Honestly if you are pirating games (that you enjoy playing) made by indie developers that cost 10$ you are an assh**e.
inactiveuserAug 12, 2010
If COD XXX was $20 I would have bought all of them...
path411Aug 13, 2010
Not to mention world of goo gets dropped to <$5 every steam sale. I think I bought mine for $2 last holiday sale.
But I think really it's no where near 90%. I know I've played my world of goo copy from several IPs.
sumosniperAug 13, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
Beep111Aug 12, 2010
Also, this shows what they are really after. Money. They don't give a s**t about protecting the artists (they're the ones that skim most of the profits off, keep in mind), they just want your cash in whatever form it comes in. It's all about the bottom line....
btaberAug 12, 2010
umm... 2008?? this is like breaking out the commodore... but still applicable today... go figure...
fuzzynyankoAug 12, 2010
It does work for Sony's PS3, and Sony does profit off of SecuRom. However, yeah, DRM gets kinda pointless if it gets defeated within 48 hours of release
pissshiversAug 12, 2010
DRM makes it harder for everybody to make a copy, but all it takes is for one person/group to crack it, and everyone can have it for free. So why inconvenience your entire customer base? To try to prevent that one guy from cracking them game? Which will inevitably happen anyway...
chief1983Aug 12, 2010
DRM may not prevent piracy, but it may protect IP. I believe there are instances where lack of an effort to protect your IP has essentially caused a forfeit of claim to it. If you are aware that your IP is being distributed or infringed and take no steps to prevent it, it sets up a bad precedent in court. A lot of things that get attributed to corporate evil are really the result of the companies having their hands tied by legal mumbo jumbo.
LucasArts is a good example of this. They've sent C&D letters to mod developers in the past for unlicensed use of their IP (various characters, ships, etc from the Star Wars universe for instance), even to mods which aren't making any money. They look like the bad guy, sure, but knowingly allowing this can be the start down a slippery slope that's hard to climb back up. Smaller companies don't see the problem here, but it's only after you've lost a crushing case that you, as a company, start to take anything like that seriously. I'm not saying I agree with shutting down mods or DRM, but it's not always corporate greed that's the sole root of the problem. It's rarely that cut and dry.
Publicly traded companies I'm sure do push for much stricter measures than are necessary though, as many stockholders only see money leaking out of the piggy bank.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
travelsonicAug 12, 2010
"DRM may not prevent piracy, but it may protect IP."
BS. DRM has historically been cracked extremely rapidly.
Closed AccountAug 12, 2010
I don't think you read his comment correctly or in full.
If I read it correctly, it isn't that DRM actually protects stuff, it is that it is SEEN to be protecting stuff.
It shows that the copyright holder is making an effort to protect it, whether or not it is effective.
chief1983Aug 12, 2010
Sorry if I used too many big words for you Travelsonic. ohreilly got the idea though.
travelsonicAug 12, 2010
chief,
explain how
"DRM may not prevent piracy, but it may protect IP."
makes ANY sense? If it can't prevent piracy, it can't "protect" the IP in the sense that is most relevant to its implementation.
frostekAug 13, 2010
In the same way that breaking and entering a house is a crime, whereas leaving a door open could be argued as an invitation.
The locked door doesn't have to be indestructible. It just has to be present.
dalhectarAug 12, 2010
C&D letters ≠ DRM.
Publishers that do not use DRM can still use other means to protect IP, and those measures would stand as proof that a company values its IP.
chief1983Aug 12, 2010
You're right, they're not the same thing, thanks for pointing that out :P
These extreme DRM measures are going too far to protect just IP, and it is likely stockholder interference leading to such insanity. I can still fire up DOSBOX and play MechWarrior 2, or King's Quest 1, etc, but it's not likely that I'll ever be able to do something like that with a modern DRM-laden game. Anything that phones home to big brother is being played on borrowed time, quite literally.
But DRM can still serve as a means to protect IP. The idea of DRM as revenue protection is when companies start doing stupid things.
Think about it though, let's say there's a really advanced available DRM out there. You choose to use a very lax mechanic, or virtually no mechanic at all to protect your product. You later start attacking known pirates of your product. They get a lawyer. Is it not likely that the lawyer might make the attempt that as such strict preventative DRM measures were available, and chosen not to be used by the company, that they weren't terribly interested in protecting their IP in the first place, only choosing to make an attempt after the fact?
I'm not saying it's right either way, but just some food for thought.
dalhectarAug 12, 2010
"DRM can still serve as a means to protect IP."
Agreed.
Just one of those A is a subset of B but B is not a subset of A type of things.
tommyboy919Aug 12, 2010
Old article is old...
maccawaccaAug 12, 2010
Obvious observation is obvious (apart from to the idiots that fund DRM)
tommyboy919Aug 12, 2010
Touche
kungfuj35u5Aug 12, 2010
I'll be buying Postal 3 when the Linux port is on the way.
crytekemployee3Aug 12, 2010
look, a lot of people here work at mcdonalds or target. I work for crytek. DRM does help.
Expert opinion 1. Non expert opinion 0.
nuff said
nitrojunky24Aug 12, 2010
no s**t
alaskalonewolfAug 12, 2010
DRM is old news...
Closed AccountAug 13, 2010
DRM is as inefficacious as weed prohibition, i.e., doesn't solve the problem and does more harm than good.
thekitchensinkxAug 13, 2010
FTA: "If, for example, you told me that I could obtain a bag of chips by pressing a button, I’d be would do so, even if I wasn’t hungry."
Editors, people. We need editors.
(read: "I'd would be do so")
cyber2uallAug 13, 2010
December 2008? This article is as finely honed and relevant today as it will be in early December 2012, just before a wrathful Pluto, God of the Underworld destroys Gaia and her inhabitants for shaming his planetary status.
Seriously though, DRM is ineffectual. Suing and imprisoning are equally as ineffectual.
There are still children in Tibet who haven't heard the chant "f**k the MPAA/RIAA!" and been taught to use bittorrent software.
There are still people who want to watch our every keystroke in the digital world in order to hit us up for our real world money.
There's also those who want to create in the digital world and get a paycheck for that work in the real world.
And the lawyers who want to get paid out of this in any way they can.
DRM is a bad idea that will never change.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountAug 13, 2010
second hand games market guys. stores like EB games were making a killing from second hand games and the production companies didn't think they should be allowed to, so created a system that will harm their market.
muffinmonkAug 13, 2010
You think?
thehyphenatorAug 13, 2010
This article is two years old! What the hell is it doing on Digg now?
bintoAug 13, 2010
I've said it many times before and ill say it again here: drm is like gun control - it only hurts the people who play by the rules. If one wants to acquire a gun they find a way and do it. No law stops them. If someone wants a game they'll get it and no drm is gonna stop them.
hotpuck6Aug 13, 2010
1.KIll DRM
2.Make better product
3.Underpants gnomes?
4.Profit!
bijaAug 13, 2010
There is some software I bought for printing out patterns to sew, but they have it so you have to activate it for it to work. Every time I get a new computer or new hard drive, I forget to deactivate it before I switch over, then I have to call the company and have them help me get it activated again. One time I had to wait over a 3-day weekend to get someone on the phone. I do not want to buy any more software that requires activation. It worries me that one day the company will go out of business and I won't ever be able to use it again. I am sure that this pattern software is mostly sold to people who are honest and wouldn't be pirating it. It hurts the customers to have to go through all this hassle.
k3nt0456Aug 13, 2010
DRM does work, if you have to jump through too many hoops to crack something or play it online you'll just give up and purchase a "clean copy".
No matter what crazy world you think you're living in, a triple A DRM free game would be financial suicide.
kokonut10Aug 13, 2010
Old article is old.
slaeryxAug 17, 2010
wtf, this story is from 2008 and it was outdated then as well