As seen in the latest iteration of the Gamer's Bill of Rights Stardock has been working with trusted partners to come up with a framework that would give PC gamers a better experience while still having a realistic chance of being adopted by publishers.
One of the issues that keeps coming up is IP protection. What we keep being told privately is that "Sure, your games don't need copy protection because your demographic is less likely to pirate but even if we agreed with your philosophy, we will never be able to sell DRM-free games to management".
This eventually leads to the issue that the alternatives for intellectual property protection are limited.
So what alternatives do developers have today?
SecuROM. This is what has been used by Electronic Arts in Spore, Mass Effect, and most other titles. Ubisoft uses it as well such as in Far Cry 2.
Pros: Makes developers feel their IP is well protected. It is quite effective at slowing down cracking of games, especially to on-line features (Spore was leaked day 1 but only the unprotected versions of it, you couldn't make use of on-line features). Cons: Apparently installs a device driver that stays behind. Developers have used it to hard-code a limited number of life-time activations (3 in Spore initially raised to 5 more recently).
Pros: Makes developers feel their IP is well protected. It is quite effective at slowing down cracking of games, especially to on-line features (Spore was leaked day 1 but only the unprotected versions of it, you couldn't make use of on-line features).
Cons: Apparently installs a device driver that stays behind. Developers have used it to hard-code a limited number of life-time activations (3 in Spore initially raised to 5 more recently).
Steamworks. Valve protects its games and offers to third parties the ability to protect their titles and gain the feature benefits of Steam.
Pros: Proven 0-day protection by installing the last bit of the game upon installation. Includes a ton of other features such as hardware tracking, updates via the Steam client, and more. Cons: Requires Steam (the client) to be installed with the game. Requires the user to create a Steam account.
Pros: Proven 0-day protection by installing the last bit of the game upon installation. Includes a ton of other features such as hardware tracking, updates via the Steam client, and more.
Cons: Requires Steam (the client) to be installed with the game. Requires the user to create a Steam account.
Starforce. Starforce is pretty well known in the industry.
Pros: Quite secure at making games harder to crack. Cons: Installs drivers on the user's system. Reported compatibility issues.
Pros: Quite secure at making games harder to crack.
Cons: Installs drivers on the user's system. Reported compatibility issues.
There are a number of others but those seem to be the most prevalent right now.
My opinion on the matter, reflected in Stardock's position on copy protection is that anything the inconveniences legitimate customers is unacceptable. The goal should be to increase sales, not stop piracy. Focus on the people who buy games and make them want to buy your game. Don't make them feel like chumps for buying your game (such as having them jump through hoops to get it to work while a pirate can just get a torrent).
One of the major philosophies of Impulse has been to try to change the way licensing works. Today, licensing tends to focus on the PC rather than the user. This makes the user feel like they're renting a game. If I buy a game, it's MINE. I paid for it. I should be able to use it on my machines as much as I want as long as only 1 copy is being used at once (unless it's a Stardock game where we allow multiple people on a LAN to play from a single copy).
So what could we make that might help gamers but still be acceptable to publishers?
I think, for starters, is that any IP protection should correspond with some user benefit.
Here are some examples:
a) Publisher wants Internet activation in their game. Okay, label that you require that but give the user the ability to re-download it.
Publisher wants to provide 0-day protection to their game. Okay, but be clear about that but also make sure you're giving the user the latest/greatest version so I don't have to hunt for patches on day 1.
In many respects, Steamworks takes care of a lot of this. But it requires the Steam client. A game that uses Steamworks can't be on Impulse or be sold in other channels where the website/store/distributor doesn't want to be distributing a competitor's store to people or having their customers create a Steam account. I have a Steam account and I like Steam but I don't think it would be a great thing if there was only 1 vendor. Particularly if the one vendor could potentially (and likely) be acquired by one of the major publishers down the line.
Impulse has the Impulse Reactor platform. The Political Machine, Sins of a Solar Empire v1.1, and Demigod use Impulse Reactor for multiplayer match-making and a variety of additional game and software functionality. Impulse Reactor has the benefit that it's free and is simply a DLL that users include with their game.
We could integrate IP protection features for developers who want to protect their IP and do it in such a way that is just as effective as other methods but a lot less intrusive. Because while Stardock itself can and will continue to release its retail games with no CD copy protection, other publishers have different needs and as a practical matter, they are going to use something. The question is whether they should have more alternatives?
What do you think?
I have a cold so some of this may come out muddled.
I no longer buy any retail games, most of my gaming is via a Games on Demand service called Metaboli (who recently bought GameTap), some through Startdock/Impulse and the rest (though not much recently) Steam.
Metaboli and Steam both require an internet connection to play - Metaolbi always, no offline mode; Steam has an offline mode.
Both of Metaboli and Steam are at least as secure in and of themselves, due to the way they work, as any separate DRM system. Mataboli particularly so.
And yet in both cases most of the publishers that use them still insist that their games retain their own internal DRM systems.
I really don't see the publishers changing any time soon in this respect. They have been taken in hook-line-and-sinker by the "PC gamers are all would-be pirates" argument and aren't about to change any time soon. There are and can be no reliable historical statsistics that will show them the impact of DRM versus no-DRM on sales or on the level of piracy itself - there is no way to measure it and both sides could cut the statistics to show anything they want.
I therefore don't think that Stardock offering an alternative would benefit anyone:
- it would have to be perceived by the publishers as beeng as "secure" as the alternatives
- it would have to be perceived by the gamers as as non-intrusive [and of-benefit]
And I think those two are actually mutually exclusive: to the publishers "secure" includes invasive and hard to remove which translates as "intrusive" to gamers. It doesn't matter how many benfits you add you will still have the screams of "what's this sh*t doing to my system".
So, I say stick to your principles - if they want to add additional protection then that's their problem.
Remember that you are offering protection in the form of online activation and updates. Anyone that wants the full benefits of support and updates has to be legit.
Heh heh heh...
@WebReg - You should try gamersgate. It is run by a company very similar to SD. In fact I wish they would merge one day.
Also dont forget about the new GOG site. It rocks as well.
@Spartan: From what I can tell GamersGate and GOG both work on the same principle as services like Direct2Drive and TryGames, Metaboli offer that service too. They seem to call themselves Games on Demand but are in fact more like Impulse & Steam - purchase and play individual games. Main difference being reduced or no DRM.
Metaboli is true Games on Demand - monthly subscription based acccess to the entire catalogue from anywhere, on any machine based on your personal login.
It's far from perfect but it's getting there. The main problems with it (that are unique to it) at present are:
1. Very limitted support (almost none) for modding. This is a technical limitation due to the game data being stored in encrypted virtual drives so any modding data that needs to go in the games folders can't be done. Games like Civ IV whose mods are stored in My Games work.
2. Slow patching - although it is semi-automated. This is mostly the fault of the publishers in providing the patches in a timely manner - there's a slight delay in some cases to convert the patch to an approriate format.
Both of the above can lead to obvious problems with on-line play.
3. Some short sighted publishers don't want to play.
Currently it works best for casual players (like me) - hard core, gotta have the latest game, mod and version and gotta play on-line players would get frustrated. I may be over-stating the on-line play issue a bit - I'm not an online gamer so can't really judge.
Thanks for the references tho - I'll definitely check them out.
Wow. Not the kind of service I'm interested in to be frank. I want to always have access to my game and not lose it when I decide to stop paying the monthly toll. To me games on demand are those I can purchase when I want and keep them. Just like SD does now. Thanks for the info nonetheless.
DRM has proven to not be effective for music, isn't it a matter of time until it is realised for games?
And that's what I'm saying is ok.
I don't care if BioWare exists or not.
If they cease to exist it doesn't mean that players suddenly dont' want to play RPGs anymore. Which opens up the chance for other developers to establish themselves in a similar position. It won't happen instantly but I'm patient (as long as it's not about not-MoM, then I can't wait ). It's not like it's impossible for other developers to make similar games. Or different games which could be even better (or worse).
I personally could live with a few years of game shortages if it would mean that future games would have reasonable DRM stuff.
All that said, EA won't go bankrupt and they'll let BioWare live until they decide to abolish it's brand like all the others anyway. The problem after all is, the normal customer won't be informed enough to really make a difference and/or most customers will just go with the DRM stuff and don't change their buying habits (as you do [not to be meant as a slight, just a statement of fact]).
So it's just theoretical speculation in the end.
Oh come on, arguing for lassez-faire capitalism is fun, especially since I'm an anarcho-marxist.
But to be a bit more serious, yes capitalism and art respectively "good" games is probably antagonistic. But I would claim the we allready have (mostly) laissez-fair capitalism in the games industry and honestly it doesn't really work very well (at least not in producing games for my taste and requirements). So I just applied the idea that if each customer would be informed enough and care enough about this subject that it would (should) lead to the collapse of the current industry (mainly the current large publishers) [thats how the market should work in theory anyway, or so I was told ). This of course won't happen, since the necessary preconditions probably are pretty much impossible in the real world, but it would be a nice utopia.
And as I've said, if that doesn't happen I don't see any change possible (at least not in the near future).
--------------------------
But to come back on topic, imho Frogboy your mission is impossible: (pun intended)
- Current methods for DRM don't work. (As any torrent tracker is proof of).
- They get percieved to be working because they use draconian methods.
Now any solution you'll be able to make most likely won't work either (as in not working = still be pirateable in some way) but won't be as harsh in method as the existing schemes.
Now, since, in my oppinion, all current DRM methods are only working on a psychological level (gives psychological comfort to the publishers/shareholders/developers) your solution will never be seen as good as the existing ones, simply because they are better for the customer and don't have the same subjective protection feel as the others, even though the result would be the same.
Of course it's not a bad idea if you still would try it, but I just wager that as soon as one of the StarDock protected games appears as a torrent all those DRM favouring publisher will just say, see it doesn't work so we won't use it. Even though their own DRM stuff has the same problem.
Well, that's my pessimistic theory.
Edit: Grml why is the quote system still broken?
Edit2:
Afaik stores like iTunes and others still use some sort of DRM? Or did it get abolished entirely?
That's what I thought until I tried it out - your talking £13 (GBP) - maybe $9 (USD) a month for full access (cheaper for older games). At that price you can even use it as a "try before you buy" deal. Lets you mess around with games you might otherwise ignore too - found some gems that way. If a games crap you haven't lost any cash on buying it.
Geez, sounds like an advert - sorry. It works for me but I can see it wont work for everyone.
As Vanderburg says - it's psychological. It is blatantly obvous that draconian DRM works no better than the old "type in word 7 on page 23" method - and it hasn't worked since it was introduced, so coming up with something else that wont work, wont change anything.
It's the "extended warranty" scam all over again - pay 1/3 the cost of the thing you buy each year for "full cover" only to find it lasts more than 3 years and you could have bought a new one. It gives them false comfort to spend good money, that could be spent improving the games and providing better support, on useless "cover".
Oh, here's an idea. Someone tell the publishers lawyers that they should re-write their contract with the DRM developers such that if a cracked version of their game appears then the DRM must, by definition, not work so they should be able to recover the costs of the DRM licenses - and damages for the loss of sales.
The problem with Steam is that it requires the user to reset offline mode from time to time. I'm not sure of the details, but I know from experience I can't just activate the game, set offline mode, and play it whenever I like over the following months or years. Since I very rarely go online from my gaming PC, this is a deal-breaker and I will never buy another Steam game.
Something like that was lurking around in my head too - good idea. Of course, we know that they know that DRM is already a failure. They`re addicted to the control, the stat. tracking, and the marketting applications such excuses. They want advertising access to us. They are terrified of the empowerment the Interlag provides the individual: that if we want something, *we* can endeavour to look *them* up. We are not in the television/radio 'captive audience' world anymore. We essentially require only a product page that can be returned in a web search, or a decent news site that will make mention of developments in the field.
A few months ago, The Install limits on BioShock were removed. Now that game is free to be played with at anytime in the future. The reason is that the game is yesterday's news. I can see the nesessity to have install limits because it prevents friends from swapping the game and kills the Used game's market. Therefore, all new sales profits go straight to the developers and publishers. But after a game has Lost its main stream focus and only retains its core audience, once the masses have moved on, The install limits should be abolished for the rest of the game's life. Seriously, after 1 year, I doubt you will still have your extra 2 or so activations still unused. HDD crash, windows breaks, your house could be robbed or burn down, or hit by lightning. All of the major sales have been completed a year after release. Take the hand cuffs off and give us some Freedom.
I have Lost pretty much all interest in Sins of the Solar Empire, mainly due to that it didn't turn out to be the type of game I wanted to play. I wanted something a lot deeper, like Gal Civ 2 or Space Empires V, but with cool real time graphics and RTS style battles. I hope that maybe some of the new expansions will add some new stuff to get me excited to play the game again one day. I'll buy them just to see what its like. I don't care how easy or hard it is to pirate a game, I don't want to do it. Its not because of some silly reasons that I like to support the industry. I just take Pride in not being a criminal.
Many years ago I realised that buying new games was a waste of cash and switched to waiting until they dropped in price, realistically only a matter of a few months.
This started to slip a few years ago when I was fortunate enough to be earning sufficient to make it less of an issue - so I fell back into the bad habit of buying games on or soon after release. I was still a lot more selective in what new games I bought.
I am now seeing a few things happening:
- alternatives like Metaboli are becoming available
- world-wide internet distribution when done at a fair exchange rate reduces the rip-off even for newlly released games
- internet bargain bins are even better value that retail ones
So, if you are smart about it you can save a fortune and still get to play the games you want and, as pointed out above, without the DRM hassles. Where the publishers win is that the vast majority of purchasers are not smart about it, they fall for the hype. So savy PC gamers on here and elsewhere saying "Oh, this is terrible, I'll never buy another one of their games because ..." probably wont make them sweat a great deal.
Ditto - as a software developer its unjustifiable to me, but it stems from a life long philosophy.
Uncle Drood might be on to something here. We need to stop thinking in terms of boycotts, and think more of hostile takeover! Every Stardock customer buys 10 shares in EA, and we could get a substantial voice in how the company runs. They obviously don't listen to their customers, but they have to listen to their shareholders!
Think we have enough to get a majority? We could buy up all the shares and give them to Stardock...
they have a market cap of about 8 Billion Dollars currently, maybe if the markets really crash it is worth considering
It seems to me the more efficient way would simply be for SD to start a steady acquisition of EA stock and at the current market prices it would be a steal for sure. Then after obtaining at least a 5% block having Frogboy submit himself for BoD membership.
I can`t help but think about the possibility that any large publisher who does not appreciate Stardock`s approach to IP, licensing, and DRM may try to sink hooks into you and corrupt you.
Stardock is competition, both business-wise and philosophically. Every turn of success you have (essentially) without DRM disproves their position. Every sale you make validates your argument and invalidates their stance. I can`t help but conceive of a scenario in which the Big Boys® try to muddy the waters, even just via disinformation once they have become 'officially' associated with Impulse in some way.
I would humbly counsel caution and prudence.
http://kotaku.com/5069015/even-germanys-box-art-is-censored-now
This is lame. I post it however, not only for the image of the forthcoming Miss November (top right), but also because of something said about the Steam service which disturbs me. According to a reply following that article, Steam segregates digital downloads according to region. This means a culturally medieval fascist state like Germany (funny how they seem to become that which they strive to avoid...) succeeds in censoring content.
Please don`t do this, Impulse. Accommodation leads to acceptance, and norms. Conversely, I like Liberty.
Well, waiting for a few months before buying a game is usually not just a good ideat due to monetary reasons. Eversince the initial releases of games became so buggy they were hardly payable (can you say MoO3?) I started waiting at least half a year before I make my purchase. In the mean time I read the corresponding forums to assure I'm up to speed with what issues the game has and what's being fixed/improved through patches/updates.
Protected? ROFLMAO Look at all these zero-day or earlier torrents. Nice effectiveness i say! It delays cracking by several hours And online features should be protected server-side. Client-side protection like SecuROM should have nothing to do with it.
Anyway, since a non-existant protection like SecuROM is enough, i think there will be the same degree of protection if Impulse games will require an online connection and a valid CD-Key so to install the game and patches. Also, it may require either an online connection (see below) or a DVD disc so to run a game, i think it's ok even for singleplayer games. It can be easily cracked, but SecuROM isn't any better either. StarForce-like protection that can't be easily cracked will require a kernel-level drivers which you don't like, and it's not worth it to make your own protection when StarForce FrontLine ProActive is readily available.
Online connection so to play the game - something like Stream, but a lightweight one. Server should allow to launch only one game per CD-Key at the same time.
I bet Blizzard beats Bungie with one hand tied
Some people also use DSL connections or an internet through VPN... Say, i have a non-fixed IP on both my internet connections. Do some research before giving weird ideas.
The article is completely wrong there generally isn't censorship in germany. the USK is just a rating board saying a game is suited for 0,6,12,16 or 18 years old guys and many publishers try to aim for the 16 years rating. There is also another agency which can ban games from being advertised (happens for some games rarely, postal2 is one example, publisher often also release a cut version then) and in very rare cases, only happened for Manhunt and Manhunt2 and some nazi-games as far as I know, they are completely forbidden.
On the other hand there are games which are cut in the us-version and uncut in the german/european version:
http://www.schnittberichte.com/schnittbericht.php?ID=3964
(generally germany in a lot more liberal with sexuality than with violence but then if there is excessive violence used in highly artistical films like Old Boy, films from Kim-Ki-Duk or David Lynch they still get rated 16+ not 18+ . There is a clear distinction between violence and glorification of violence in germany)
Hmmm. Well, if censorship is not an issue in at least the Left4Dead packaging case, then why *is* the packaging different - to be precise, toned down?
Manhunt by the way was a brilliant game that finally allowed you to hammer the living Hell out of some of the most reprehensible beings mankind has ever spawned, unlike the Grand Theft series wherein you generally play as one (! To my mind...).
I know all of Europe is more liberal/sane with sex than the West. As for violence, I believe such a distinction between glorification/gratuitous and necessary/artistic is ultimately entirely subjective and should therefore not be in the purvue of the state.
I don't know what's printed on the packaging case of this game, but probably because although they officially cannot buy the games minors could still look at the case and see pictures of excessive violence/sex or whatever.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
