Spore DRM

[purplerat]

Companies have a right to a return on their IP, but not at the expense of paying customers.

Actually isn't that the idea of a business, to make a profit at the expense of paying consumers?

 

[Falcon688]

Huh? I'm not sure what you're writing about here. What indepedent game creator are you referring to? I'm confused, please help me clear this one up.

Hi Rob,

I think this guy is talking about the Stardock CEO who said that they were not using DRM so that they would not piss off their paying customers. Here is the article.

http://news.bigdownload.com/2008/06/18/big-download-interview-stardock-ceo-brad-wardell/

It's a good read. It's gets better when you factor in that they had 15 million $ in sales from Sins without DRM!

 

[doctorx]

Hi Rob,

I think this guy is talking about the Stardock CEO who said that they were not using DRM so that they would not piss off their paying customers. Here is the article.

http://news.bigdownload.com/2008/06/18/big-download-interview-stardock-ceo-brad-wardell/

It's a good read. It's gets better when you factor in that they had 15 million $ in sales from Sins without DRM!

Actually that was another one... (forgot about this one). Good catch! 😀

 

[Falcon688]

Companies have a right to a return on their IP, but not at the expense of paying customers.

Actually isn't that the idea of a business, to make a profit at the expense of paying consumers?

I don't think so... The idea of business is to fill a need for a profit.

So a good business should sell bug free not DRM'd software to its customers and make money. As a gamer, I want the game, not the DRM and I am willing to pay for the game.

Yes, their are many businesses that go too far and take more for their product then it's worth (Microsoft with its monopoly on OS's comes to mind or Nvidia's high end graphics cards before ATI got its act together) but that's greed and not business. Intel did not dramatically raise prices when AMD dropped the ball last year... the Q6600 might go down to history as one of the best buys ever and that was during a time when ATI had nothing to compete with. Yes, Intel is not perfect, the insane prices of their QX line comes to mind but they're still a good example. So is Stardock with no DRM on any of their games or THQ (the guys who did Supreme Commander) who have announced no DRM on Demigod.

 

[blacklightknight]

None of this is going to change until YOU, as the paying consumer, takes back your power. What's your power, you ask? Your power of the pocketbook. START A REVOLUTION by stopping BUYING! The only thing these giant multi-billion dollar corporations care about is sucking every penny out of you with no regard for your happiness or satisfaction. If they can get away with ANYTHING that makes them more money, even if it's at a loss to you, they will do it and continue doing it until all you sheeple STOP BUYING THEIR CRAP!!!!

I myself have been on a personal protest after I got burned with the "Windows Live" fiasco from Gears of War. I have not bought (nor stole or pirated) a game since, nor will I ever again. To me video gaming is dead and non- existent until the total and unconditional removal of any system that treats me like I'm some sort of F-ing potential criminal because I want to participate in some sort of entertainment product that I have to pay for. If I bought it, damn it, IT"S NOW MINE, to do with whatever I god-damn want to do with it. This is a capitalist society. I'm not renting or leasing your video game, I'm BUYING it. If they don't like it, then don't sell it, RENT IT!

I stopped buying music in 2000 when they started the DRM B.S. and now, almost a decade later the major studios finally got it it and have all but dropped it. Now I don't even care about music anymore and have no plans of buying any.

Unfortunately, the PC gaming industry won't survive that long, they're already feeling their death pains and are blaming it on pirating instead of taking a good look in the mirror and seeing that they themselves are the cause of their loss in sales. A lot of people are not computer savvy, they want to use them like a toaster, they pop in the disk and it plays. The last thing they want is to spend fifty bucks of their hard earned money on a game only to have to deal with all the bull-s*** of DRM, securom and online activations.

CONSUMERS REVOLT, STOP BUYING! BOYCOTT MONEY HUNGRY CORPORATIONS!!!!

 

[sojrner]

I hate piracy too.... but piracy as you have defined it is black and white... while the truth is not that clear.

Oh, but I believe it IS as stark as black and white. The fact that most don't see this is the reason this thread even exists and the discussion continues elsewhere. There is NO justification for "piracy"

I personally love the cd key way of combating piracy like how Unreal Tournament was packaged. You did not need the cd in the drive any more with a patch they released (yea... blizzard did that with starcraft and diablo2 also). In order to play online, you had to have an unique key. I am fine with that. I feel it was effective... and unobtrusive.

Coming from a longtime UT fan that preordered each game after playing the original Unreal... I agree that it is unobtrusive. Only after their initial sales tapered off did they release a patch that removed the CD check. It checked the CD usually for the first 6 months or so in order (I assume) to keep sales up. Once sales taper off the piracy binge is usually no longer an issue.

BUT... looking at Epic's response with the craptacular sales of UT3 (relating the monumental size of illegit copies running online from cracks/piracy) it is only further proving that piracy is increasing and "simple" CD checks and key requirements are not enough. Not making any allowances for if a particular game sucks or not, just using the example you mentioned.

I echo Rob's take that DRM sucks but pirates suck just as bad for causing the need for DRM...

 

[dtq]

Oh, but I believe it IS as stark as black and white. The fact that most don't see this is the reason this thread even exists and the discussion continues elsewhere. There is NO justification for "piracy"

Actually piracy is far from black and white. Especially varying from country to country. Here in the UK it is illegal to even rip a cd to put on your mp3 player or PC, most people would NOT consider this piracy but the companies themselves have said they consider it piracy.

Ive seen software companies calling pre-owned games in shops as "retail piracy". Many games companies would say installing a second copy of a game you brought legally piracy! Most would probably object to people who had brought a copy of a game downloading and using a DRM free version yet MOST people here would consider that morally fine.

The reason for this discussion isnt so much what constitutes piracy which is very murky indeed, the purpose of this discussion is DRM and the level of annoyance it causes for LEGAL owners of the game or for potential legal owners of the games..

 

[sojrner]

Based on reading everyone's thoughts in this thread, the context of this discussion is that "piracy" is getting a copy of a game w/o purchasing it legally from the original owner. (i.e. from a game shop or a digital distribution site sanctioned by the developer/publisher)

In this context, copying something you already purchased is not in that definition. That is another discussion for another time. DRM as laid out by companies like EA is focused on keeping sales from tanking due to pirates illegally obtaining copies. A secondary aspect is to prevent "legit" copying, but that is not the primary goal based on what I read here.

so, for what I said in my previous post, with this definition of piracy: it IS black and white and there is NO justification to do it.

clear up my stand any? 😉

 

[fulle]

I'm glad someone brought up Stardock's stance on piracy. (Stardock and Valve both seem to understand perfectly).

When I purchased Sins, I chose the product over Mass Effect due to DRM... I ended up making a copy of the game and lending the game to a friend to try, and play with me... which is legal to do with Sins... and the friend eventually payed for the game.

Here's an idea: Instead of treating your paying customers like criminals, forcing them to download pirate made cracks to run your software properly, why not create incentives for your customers to purchase your product by providing superior support and service to those with legit copies?

What kind of moron thinks: "Lets set DRM limitations that only effect our paying customers!" Some idiot at EA must actually think DRM helps reduce piracy. The truth of the matter is DRM either has no effect on piracy, or increases it.

@sojrner its playing with fire to assume a customer will pay for a product they're forced to pirate, since paying has no incentives whatsoever. Its never black and white. The grey area this time is that purchasing the DRM product (which we need to pirate anyway) sends a message to the publisher that it was OK to use DRM.

-Personally, I'm going to wait until Spore is released without DRM or on Steam.... since that's how I'd like to vote with my money.

 

[purplerat]

Here's an idea: Instead of treating your paying customers like criminals, forcing them to download pirate made cracks to run your software properly, why not create incentives for your customers to purchase your product by providing superior support and service to those with legit copies?

Improving product quality and service is a great way for any industry to gain new customers or keep old ones. What strikes me as bizzare is the idea that it is also the best way to combat piracy. Why should any industry cater to those who are already stealling from them? Obviously any improvent is good either way but to make certain improvents "only for legit customers" would require some sort of a protection scheme anyways.

 

[sojrner]

@sojrner its playing with fire to assume a customer will pay for a product they're forced to pirate, since paying has no incentives whatsoever. Its never black and white. The grey area this time is that purchasing the DRM product (which we need to pirate anyway) sends a message to the publisher that it was OK to use DRM.

-Personally, I'm going to wait until Spore is released without DRM or on Steam.... since that's how I'd like to vote with my money.

not sure I'm following... getting a crack for a game you buy is NOT piracy based on previous definitions... thought I made that clear?

Again, this is why this discussion rages on; people are not seeing the simple contrast (in black and white) of this issue: Paying vs Not paying is where piracy is at the heart and what I am saying is that there is NEVER justification for not paying for a product when payment is required. In this context it is stealing, just like the earlier bank analogy by someone else on this thread. Thus... black and white.

There is no gray area IMO. You either pay for it, or you don't get it. Simple maths dude. If you are against the DRM (which I agree is totally crapola and does punish legit customers) then you DONT buy the game. You DO NOT however pirate it as retaliation b/c that justifies their stand on increasing DRM. Very simple to me and VERY cut and dry, black and white, yin and yang, butch and sundance, pinky and brain, yes or no...

If you do not understand where this is at after what I just said, then there is nothing I can do to clarify it... that is as crystal as I can make it. Moving on.



seque @ all: Why is it that everyone likes steam but hates all other online activation? I too find little to compain about in steam, yet it is a persistent online connection that limits me to running the game on only a single machine at any given time. If I lose connection (without first backing up and going into offline mode or something) I will not be able to run games. They check all my data and track everything I do.

Yes it is "seamless" to most gamers, but it is still very controlling and (dare I say) draconian compared to a simple cd check and yet we accept it w/ (nearly) open arms in the community.

...Interesting...

 

[fulle]

^We are in agreement that pirating without purchasing is stealing, and pirating after purchasing is OK. So, I suppose it is black and white in that respect. I was introducing the grey area, that the lesser of the 2 evils may be to pirate without buying, since paying for the product encourages DRM. While pirating may justify the stand on increasing DRM, it also shows that DRM is not an effective method to reduce piracy.

The even better option in my opinion, would be to wait for a non-DRM copy to buy, since that shows the publisher that this is the type of product we want to purchase... and of course, doesn't involve stealing.

The reason why Steam is supported by the community, is because it acts as a service to legit customers as much as a piracy reduction tool to devs. While steam makes tweaking a game more difficult at times, it streamlines things like updates, and even checks things like file corruption. Its improving too, Valve plans on adding new features like the ability to put save games online. While Steam is controlling, it tries to give its customers superior service.

Edit: When discussing piracy, I think its important to remember that many pirates don't equate piracy as stealing in the same way that they would look at stealing from a store, bank, or neighbor. They will use all sorts of rationalizations, like "Its OK, since I wasn't going to buy it anyway." "The product wasn't easily available in my area." "What's the point in buying, when the product isn't supported anyway." and in this case "I hate DRM, I have no choice." If I was marketing a game, I'd try to give as many incentives as possible to purchase my software, while eliminating as many pirate rationalizations as possible. DRM only works against sales.

 

[purplerat]

Why is it that everyone likes steam but hates all other online activation? I too find little to compain about in steam, yet it is a persistent online connection that limits me to running the game on only a single machine at any given time.

In another DRM/Piracy thread I went on and on about how Steam is one of the most intrusive/controlling forms of DRM out there and nobody really seems to mind. And I love Steam too, which is why I have a real hard time getting all up in arms over similar DRM schemes. It's concievable that Spore could cause me some issues especially depending on how easy additional activations are to get. But I also know that Steam can and has caused me some issues including a couple weeks ago while on vacation not being able to play single player games on my laptop (offline mode was not working for me). Ultimately I would say that Steam offers a much greater risk than Spore w/ securom. Say in 10 years neither EA nor Steam are around. Well then my Steam games are flatout gone. But at least with a game like Spore I still have the game and just need to find a patch or crack to make it useable.

 

[fulle]

Here's an idea: Instead of treating your paying customers like criminals, forcing them to download pirate made cracks to run your software properly, why not create incentives for your customers to purchase your product by providing superior support and service to those with legit copies?

Improving product quality and service is a great way for any industry to gain new customers or keep old ones. What strikes me as bizzare is the idea that it is also the best way to combat piracy. Why should any industry cater to those who are already stealling from them? Obviously any improvent is good either way but to make certain improvents "only for legit customers" would require some sort of a protection scheme anyways.

Your right, its a little strange to think this way... but there's a bottom line that pirates are also potential customers. Lost sales. Without great product quality and service, the same audience that would willingly give you money are the same people who see no moral objection in stealing from you.

As far as the protection scheme needed for the "legit content"... it doesn't have to be anything that intrusive (and actually, needs not to be, since intrusive protection would hurt sales). Stardock's Impulse seems like a good example.

Edit: Good point on Steam and similar services' longterm availability.... I had a coworker install Homeworld last night, a 10 year old game, so its possible Steam-like services will be a problem when support is eventually dropped.

 

[Tankfox22]

Fulle: You are right and I would say that EA takes that into consideration when using DRM. In their mind pirates are lost sales (reverse of what you say), they will do it no matter what. And even if there is a backlash from the vocal hardcore gamer community, the average Joe consumer will not pay attention and buy the product based on the hype anyways. So in the end the bottom line is that their sales figures are not really impacted in their minds and at least they make it that much harder for pirates to crack their game. I don't think that's the right attitude, but I would surprised if they did not give it some consideration. It might surprise them how passionate some are in making sure that average Joe consumer at least hears some of our minds. Maybe downgrading the game accross various sites might have enough of an impact so we can at least get EA to reconsider using such DRM in the future, I will not buy Red Alert 3 or Spore with this kind of DRM. I mess around too much with my computer to take that risk.

EA also has their EA Download service, which IMO is garbage compared to Steam. Unlike Bioshock I don't think we'll see it on Steam.

Steam will be around for a long time because it seems to be the primary choice for people to buy games online. How long has Amazon stuck around now? The reality is that barring a collapse in the PC market, Steam will be around longer than most will keep their games. It seems that developers/distributors are more and more migrating towards the steam model. Steam can be a hassle as well, but I still think it's better than the Spore DRM.

 

[purplerat]

Steam will be around for a long time because it seems to be the primary choice for people to buy games online. How long has Amazon stuck around now?

There's no guarantee that only company will always be around regardless of current success. When AMD released their 64Bit and X2 CPUs who would have thought they'd be in the mess they are in today? And their better off than a lot of other companies that once ruled their respective market. The fact is that with Steam all of your eggs are in one basket. Even if Steam has better long term viability compared to other game companies it's colapse would be inversly damaging.

 

[razor512]

any DRM that links you to a external server = epic fail

no company will last for ever, but for games can last for ever at least the pirate ones and the older ones that didn't require a server side activation

but with newer games using the more annoying DRM

if the company dies then so does your game

which means, you could order spore today, and 1 day before UPS delivers the game to your door, EA could go out of business and you wont be able to install spore

the same could happen to any steam game

it doesn't matter how much steam has a better DRM than EA, both systems are still a failure by design as your games can stop working at any moment if something happens to the company

 

[radnor]

not sure I'm following... getting a crack for a game you buy is NOT piracy based on previous definitions... thought I made that clear?

Again, this is why this discussion rages on; people are not seeing the simple contrast (in black and white) of this issue: Paying vs Not paying is where piracy is at the heart and what I am saying is that there is NEVER justification for not paying for a product when payment is required. In this context it is stealing, just like the earlier bank analogy by someone else on this thread. Thus... black and white.

While paying up or not is a black&white matter, invasion of privacy isn't. Not all DRM is being questioned here. Securom is.
If i install a game that has securom, and thus crashing my OS and making me lose data, EA should pay up. I earn pretty well per hour, and so should i bill EA for my downtime and repair costs ?

I should.

There is no gray area IMO. You either pay for it, or you don't get it. Simple maths dude. If you are against the DRM (which I agree is totally crapola and does punish legit customers) then you DONT buy the game. You DO NOT however pirate it as retaliation b/c that justifies their stand on increasing DRM. Very simple to me and VERY cut and dry, black and white, yin and yang, butch and sundance, pinky and brain, yes or no...

If you do not understand where this is at after what I just said, then there is nothing I can do to clarify it... that is as crystal as I can make it. Moving on.

As i said in earlier piracy thread, Piracy is the competition in a market of exclusives. Like in voting, if you don't , like each candidates or do not agree, you file a unfilled vote. No voting holds no consequences if your angry with the system. So, pirating the game for the hell of it ( and the amazon comments ) are best way to fight it. Piracy is a much broad subject than just paying up or not.

If it is that crystal for you, i think you will never pass the speed limit, never smoked pot, never tried to evade taxes, cheat on exams, etc. Or your just too young to make such a strong statement. I guess the latter might be correct.

seque @ all: Why is it that everyone likes steam but hates all other online activation? I too find little to compain about in steam, yet it is a persistent online connection that limits me to running the game on only a single machine at any given time. If I lose connection (without first backing up and going into offline mode or something) I will not be able to run games. They check all my data and track everything I do.

Yes it is "seamless" to most gamers, but it is still very controlling and (dare I say) draconian compared to a simple cd check and yet we accept it w/ (nearly) open arms in the community.
...Interesting...

Steam system works pretty well. I might need to be online to play, or going offline mode, but i have yet to have problems with them. Yes, i do have a Steam account.

You said it your self. Pay up and BUY the product or NOT. This form DRM resembles beer, you never buy beer, you just rent it. LEGALLY falls under other categories. Don't be so black and white, or most of us will be suspicious that your are GW Bush still looking for weapons of Mass Distraction, armed with a TOms Hardware forums account.

The World isn't black and white. Business is more like a Boom Festival.

 

[razor512]

""""""""""""""""""what I am saying is that there is NEVER justification for not paying for a product when payment is required.

well """""""""""""

read up on the multitude of 3rd world countries where the piracy of food is highest

and there is a constant battle between the rich store and company others and the extremely poor people (food cost more in Africa than it does in the US when my family took a trip there, it was unexpected but food was very expensive

the reason for this is the food stores and companies have a monopoly over the land where food can be made

so theres almost no space for anyone to grow there own crops

so they take advantage of that and over charge for food, because it is something you just have to buy

(and you can notice this by the store owner having a house thats 5 times bigger than the average Americana home with a giant generator outside of the house and a crap ton of lights around the house in a neighborhood where everyone else is in a rundown shack or apartments that are falling apart ) (in the US, it is nearly impossible for the average store owner to own such a large house)

you will see "piracy" of food go on a lot over there, and the ones that don't take the food with out paying end up like this

I am not condoning piracy but the companies bring it on them self.

everyone has their own reason for pirating but the overall main reason is DRM

people hated it in the 80's and hate it even more now

the developers struck first with increasingly worst DRM and when people had to go through the trouble of removing the DRM, they just gave it out for free so no one would ever have to go through it.

it is not the wrong thing to do, it is nature

look at meerkats. they usually cant detect a snake sneaking around but if 1 of them sees it, they will sound out a warning call so no one else has to deal with the snake and they all can hopefully get to safety

if the meerkat followed DRM, it would just stay silent and run away and leave the snake to attack the rest of it's meerkat friends



same with DRM, it is the harassing snake, 1 person gets attacked by the DRM, but instead of leaving it to attack everyone else. that person sounds out a warning call for everyone else. (and since you cant use your voice on the internet and expect anything to happen. they use the voice of a computer in the form of a cracked version of the game)

it is like when your on a road and you see people put out a sign or something to warn that someone stole a manhole cover or something. they don't have to do it they just do it so no one else gets their car tire stuck in one

also know that if a store or company disrespects a it's customers, don't expect those customers to give that company their hard earned money, DRM = disrespect to paying customers

and if you have taken a history class then you will know that through out Americana history, the people have never taken crap from large companies or even the government

 

[purplerat]

it is like when your on a road and you see people put out a sign or something to warn that someone stole a manhole cover or something. they don't have to do it they just do it so no one else gets their car tire stuck in one

YEAH!!! Piracy is EXACTLY like that!!! That ends the whole discussion on Piracy and DRM because nothing sums it up better than stolen manhole covers!!!

 

[razor512]

it is like when your on a road and you see people put out a sign or something to warn that someone stole a manhole cover or something. they don't have to do it they just do it so no one else gets their car tire stuck in one

YEAH!!! Piracy is EXACTLY like that!!! That ends the whole discussion on Piracy and DRM because nothing sums it up better than stolen manhole covers!!!

it is just a example

DRM is a major hassle for who ever buys the software. but out of kindness some people will bite the bullet and get the DRMed crap, but instead of weeping in a corner, they will remove the DRM and release the fix for others so others wont have to suffer like how the maker of the drm free version did

 

[purplerat]

I agree with you, it's exactly the same as manhole covers, meerkats and starving Africans. No further debate is necessary.

 

[radnor]

radnor, sjorner knows what he is talking about, very intelligent person IMO.

I don't doubt that, i just get pissed when any subject is defined in black and white, and insist on the subject is, at least, lack of vision. This is a discussion, and when two intelligent people discuss, different conclusions are made. In his case he defend it as a black or white matter, immediately pushing the reason to himself, blocking different opinions.

That always tick me off. It is as draconian as Securom itself.

also, i personally do not break the speed limit, have never taken drugs, will never knowingly evade taxes or break any laws.

1- You will have a very boring life.
2- You lack Critical Thinking, witch is a greater sin.
3 -Ill stop here due to this being a IT forum and not going even more off topic.

you are obviously one of these weak people who will try and drag people down to your level as you can't reach theirs.

Like said before, you lack Critical Thinking, and you think generalizing is right.
Not it isn't. It is easy. Most times the easy way is different of the correct way.
Im not putting sjorner on the same level as myself. I have good fulfilled life so, and i will keep having it.
I do not know sjorner personally. This is a internet forum, where we are somewhat anonymous.
It is good because different opinions and arguments can be made in a good fashion that conclusions can be achieved.
Again, barring the way to discussion, or taking to extremist ends, is counter-productive, and stupid from various different angle.

not speaking on behalf of sjorner, maybe he does break laws but don't put everyone on the same level as you.

Do not talk as you reached a level of superior enlightenment. The only ones that do that at the moment, or suffer from deep schizophrenia, or belong to the Church of Scientology.

I advice you to search this forum for other posts, witch produced much better discussion than this one. RobWright, Ohsnap, purplerat, martin, and many others participated in a excellent level, producing good results.

 

[razor512]

I agree with you, it's exactly the same as manhole covers, meerkats and starving Africans. No further debate is necessary.

yay...


there many horror stories of the securom DRM

also if the whole piracy thing was as clear cut and black and white as some users here said it is then we wouldn't have any forum topics about it

how many times do you see people protesting Americas use of the constitution

 

[infornography42]

the reason there are so many topics on it is because people like to rehash the same old flawed arguments in piracies defence!!!!!!

To be fair, Razor constantly comes up with new and ever more absurd defenses for piracy.

Steam, when it is is working correctly, does let you play offline with no preparation. I have never had a problem getting it to work in offline mode. Apparently some people have had problems, but I never have.

I am willing to accept the risk of losing the service some day. Yeah it would suck massively, but I also doubt seriously that it will happen in even 10 years time. Right now it is raking in money hand over fist and proving to be a valuable asset to both users and publishers.

The last time I installed my computer, I just downloaded and installed Steam and Impulse, queued up all my games, and the next day I could play any of the games I had bought through those services. It was wonderful and saved me tons of time sitting there swapping out disks and futzing with keys.

Also Steam and Securom are not similar.

I can install my steam games on as many systems as I want as many times as I want. If I couldn't then I wouldn't support Steam. The core complaint with Securom is that you have 3 installs and that is it. That is quite simply unacceptable and I refuse to be a part of that. Also Steam, as I pointed out, provides a wonderfully useful service to it's customers. Securom does nothing for the end user except for make them jump through extra hoops.