I cringe when someone tries to say their DRM isn’t DRM. There’s nothing inherently wrong with DRM. The problem thus far with it is that the R part of it (rights) is often ignored. A proper acronym for DRM thus far should be DrM . The rights in DRM were supposed to be between both developers and users.
So for months, since the Gamers Bill of Rights was launched we’ve been working on a technology that would provide the kind of protection publishers want and would accept but at the same time would give gamers a lot of the things they’ve been asking for.
The solution we’ve come up with and integrated into Impulse Reactor is called Game Object Obfuscation (GOO). When a developer runs GOO on their EXE, it encapsulates it and Impulse Reactor into a single encrypted EXE. When the user runs the program for the first time, they enter in their email address and serial #. It’s about as easy as logging into a forum except you only have to do this once.
Because the game is tied to a person instead of hardware, they can install on their other machines without being hassled. Also, because it’s all self-contained it makes possible 3 key things:
1. Universal Activation. If I buy a copy of a game from Steam or Direct2Drive or Impulse that is also available on one of the other platforms, I should be able to re-download it form any of the services that it’s available on. That way, if the place I buy from folds, I can still re-download my game from someone else. A Goo’d game makes this possible.
2. Used copies. One thing that holds digital distribution back is that a gamer who buys a game digitally can be made to feel like they’re renting it because the licenses are non-transferable. Publishers, however, really don’t like reselling games (I hate the way it’s currently done). But with Goo, now the game developer and the user can both benefit and let gamers resell their copy to someone else. That’s because the Goo’d EXE is encrypted and the user can voluntarily disable their access from it thus making it transferrable.
To demonstrate the business advantages of this, we plan to use this feature of Goo ourselves on Elemental– it lowers the risk of buying a game and thus can increase sales.
3. Untethered gaming. Because Goo is all self-contained, there’s no third party client floating around. A developer can use this on their game and have it available at retail or other digital distributors.
What’s nice about GOO is that a developer simply runs it on their program. They don’t have to mess with source code or anything. It takes care of it all for them. Legitimate customers end up with something that’s incredibly benign, publishers end up something that protects their rights, and both get something that opens the door to resolving some of the remaining challenges with digital distribution.
Internal beta of Impulse Phase 3 client. UI graphics are not finalized yet. Faster, cleaner, more streamlined view. More major publishers scheduled to come on board in the month of April.
Generally speaking I like the idea of moving DRM away from the one-way street, but like other internet activation schemes I have some serious concerns about what might happen if one of the participants goes belly up. Are buyers SOL if the server gets unplugged? What happens if a third-party developer bails and people blame Stardock/Impluse for their games no longer being supported? What about if something really bad happens to the internet someday and a lot of otherwise happy buyers suddenly can't connect to Impulse? It's a topic that couldn't be more timely, as 2009 is shaping up to be the year the giants fall. Just look at MMOs, one of the earliest forays into centralized access control--two high-profile MMO closures already this year, by my estimates at least another two before the year's up. Obviously nobody wants to go out of business or see it happen to one of their affiliates, but has Stardock given any thought to how it would address that situation?
For clarity, Impulse does have DRM. All (at least the major ones) Stardock games require activation at install time, just like GOO. GOO is the same DRM Stardock has been using for a while but they are offering it to other developers.
What is special about Stardock is that if you buy the game on CD/DVD, it does *not* have any DRM. I don't fully understand why you would have DRM in digital copies of your game but not on the CD/DVD version though. Obviously Stardock doesn't believe that stopping pirating is possible (smart), hence the lack of DRM on CD/DVD copies. Yet they put DRM on the digital downloads for some reason, even though the pirates can get the game off the CD/DVD so as far as I can tell, the DRM on digital downloads serves even *less* purpose than the DRM that other publishers put out (they are simply misguided by the thought that they can stop piracy).
I guess you are forgetting the linking of Serial Id with an e-mail on Stardock servers. This allows customer to download the game whenever they want.
BTW, all Stardock games have budgeted free support after release. And at one time, those free updates require activation.
Stardock don't use DRM, you need to be online to download or update the game but once it's installed/updated you never need to be online again, you can change your hardware, you can even copy the game to another PC without ever needing to reactivate it online.
I actually did that for all the games I bought on Impulse (only three and two being Stardock games) I download and install them on my old secondary computer and then copy them to my gaming computer and I am able to play them without needing to reactivate them, heck I don't even have impulse installed on this computer.
You can't do that with Steam or D2D with both you will be forced to reactivate all your games before playing them if you change you hardware or if you copy the game to a different computer.
Hrm, am I the only one finding concern in this DRM stance by Stardock?
I understand by reading this that the goo system is designed for digital distribution, which therefore makes online activation rather pointless to bring up....but what about things like if GOO was used on a retail copy, which can and likely will happen, intentionally or otherwise?
To my understanding, it'd require online activation for a boxed, retail copy, if this is true.
Similarly, the Archiving system for Impulse. Would this be adversely affected as well for installing archived games? What if Impulse as a distribution method went out of business?
I know I'm likely grasping at straws, but I feel the questions should be raised while such a technology is being developed.
This system, though it seems to combat a lot of problems, also seems to leave a lot of questions in its wake.
I doubt this will ever happen for a very simple reason; it's a direct form of "transferable" technology & potential. The upcoming "Impulse Anywhere" (or any other subsequent versions, btw) will prove it to anyone still worrying about the future.
I hear MS (or others) has (+ had) a knack for strategic business acquisitions, and if they want SD they can certainly stack the doe. Will they?
How about Steam seeing the second wave of competition rushing towards their shores, flooding the coast as a tsunami?
Could they *also* make an offer to protect their own share of a disputed market?
Laws & good practice dictates otherwise.
In the long term, the consumer wins.
They have frequently said SD is not and will never be up for sale. The lack of stockholders means that not even a proxy war would work. And if MS tried muscling them into anything they would probably sue M$ and win (since just about anyone would believe it if M$ got in trouble for monopolizing again).
Never say never. The problem with someone wanting to acquire Stardock is that they'd have to pay so much more than Stardock is worth because there isn't much incentive for us to sell out.
Words are easy though. DEEDS are what people should be keeping an eye on. On April 7, you'll get to see some of those deeds in action.
Wait, what is happening April 7th?
Impulse phase 3 perharps, with Impulse Anywhere for installing downloaded games on a non connected gaming rig.
I was thinking this was Demigod's release date as well, but the SD store says the 14th...
Please keep this statement in mind the next time you scoff me for wanting currency to be an optional element in a game economy. I'd love to play a game where this sort of decision was not just possible, but could be a rewardingly successful one.
I'm more interested in the mechanics of re-sale as this is all clearly an attempt to give the publishers a foothold in the second hand market.
Will it be a fixed or a diminishing returns based system?
Ohhh... now I get the concept.
I didn't realize the reselling of games is going to be through Impulse instead of end-user to end-user.
Peer to peer selling does the developers and publishers more harm than good and is why they argue against it. If everyone gets a cut and the consumer gets a deal, everyone can win.
. . . how?
I hate to compare digital good to physical goods - but physical goods have had the concept of "peer to peer" selling from the earliest days of written history, perhaps much longer.
The only reason it's been so unpopular with digital goods is the risk of the owner keeping a copy. As I understand it, basically GOO takes care of this aspect when the item is "sold" back to the publisher.
So if that's the case, then it can be treated like a physical good, and "peer to peer" does no more "harm" than the resale of physical items. And I certainly don't see a big fuss about physical items being resold!
This is the only market I've seen where a third party claims that resale is "harm" if they don't get a cut.
Does Honda get a cut if I resell my Civic? No.
Does the RIAA get a cut if I resell my CDs? No.
Does Logitech get a cut if I resell my joystick? No.
Does Wal-Mart get a cut if I resell my clothes? No.
Does Acer get a cut if I resell my netbook? No.
Does the furniture store get a cut if I resell my furniture? No.
Do any companies get any cut if I have a garage sale? No.
The gaming industry seems to be the only industry that's so paranoid about resale. And honestly, I thought it was the issue of the owner keeping a copy that they were so wound up about, because that's where the only real harm could come from.
If the game is uninstalled and all copies are destroyed, then I do not see the simple act of reselling as harmful.
100% Agree. It boggles the mind that the gaming industry thinks it should be entitled a cut of the secondary market when almost no other market has its hand in those transactions either.
But in those cases, you get directly the good. With digital distribution, you need to be able the game whose serial id you have got. And as digital distribution is involved, somebody has to pay for support (in case of problem to install or start the game) and bandwith for download. When the serial id can't be transfered, you have only one customer that have problems. Or if he reinstalls the game on a new computer, he may be able to identify some problems before asking for support.
But that can be not the case if serial can change hand. You must take in account the fact that each time the serial change hand, a new download will occurs (which can be of great size) as well as possible call to support.
BTW, the above describes the reason given by Stardock to not allow serial transfer. It seems they have starting to change their view on the subject.
Except the gaming industry was whining about not getting their hands in the cookie jar long before digital distribution was becoming a reality. Companies like EA had tried to kill it even when there is a physical disc to be exchanged. This argument didn't just show up over night when Steam and Impulse and other digital distributors suddenly found a new way to explain the same old argument.
Nope, not always. Heaven knows I've paid plenty for S&H with physical products, and I've bought my share of used physical products where some repair/assembly was required. Doesn't sound too different from your complaints about bandwidth costs and support costs.
Who did pay for repair and assembly in those case?
Why shouldn't be an equivalent for digital download of used games?
One of the problems is how the re-sale of items will be accomplished. If its left completely upto the publisher then you could see a large reduction in purchase costs (for arguements sake....20% of the original price) coupled with large increases in re-sale prices (2-300% on the re-purchase costs). As the only viable method of re-sale you will be forced to accept this.
To get around that, you have to enable peer to peer sales (through GOO would still allow for a percentage of the re-sale to go to the publisher) something which in itself causes a multitude of other problems like a fluxtuating market based on available supply and demand.
GOO is an accurate name for it...could be a very sticky mess.
With many goods, the warranty transfers with the sale of the item, so the manufacturer is still on the hook for support even though they get no cut of the second hand sale.
And as pointed out, that argument was made before digital distribution was prevalent. But I'm not sure I see the concern here with the bandwidth usage when the game is DLed again. This is one of the highly touted features of these digital distribution platforms: that you can DL your games whenever you want, as many times as you want. Seems odd to then claim that bandwidth usage is a big deal.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
