UbiSoft require that you must have a net connection to play games...

[SwampFae]

This can only be a bad thing for me. ...[SNIP]... If I have to have an internet connection to play an offline game then I'll just not buy that game; after all, if I can't play when I want then what's the point?

Agreed.
Same goes for me, tbh.
Demanding that you have an internet connection for games that should be playable offline (I.E: 1P games) is not a good thing.
Demanding online mode for everything is like demanding that your old GameBoy needs to be online just so you can play Tetris

As for applications in the background.
At some point I am sure that they'll just stop trying and put it all in as Services(if running WIndows, at least)


Piracy: Theft? In a way, yes.
But in some ways it can also be the best free advertising game companies can get.
Example: Some download an ISO of a game. Install. Play. Like it so much that they then go and buy the game.
Ofcourse, there are some that don't, even if they love the game. Heck. Some do not even buy it when the prices have dropped quite a bit.
So downloading the ISO and then buying the game because you like it: Sure. Good free advertising that leads to more customers. I see that more as a trial run before buying it.
But otherwise. Naw.

 

[Silk]

In none of those cases are you stealing the product, and then paying for it later if you decide you like it.

As for DRM... Quick question for you: why do we have it in the first place?

Well that's easy, we have it because people don't know how to tackle piracy.

You could say we have it because of piracy, but then you're fighting a losing battle and to be honest, shouting into the wind.

DRM punishes the innocent, and as such was never the correct way to stop piracy. It hasn't stopped piracy, I daresay piracy is on the rise since DRM was introduced, and I can completely understand why - people such as myself who are happy to pay for a game, don't appreciate being told how many times it can be installed, and on how many machines. I have a PC and a laptop and I re-install things frequently so I tend to shy away from DRM games completely.

If DvD's would only play on one DvD player I wouldn't buy those, either.

The industry can evolve to encourage people to buy in so many varied ways that I've already discussed, but crime and theft won't ever vanish. The people who can't afford games will still steal. The people who pirate because of DRM will stop doing so once DRM is obliterated. The people pirating because they are lazy will stop doing so once digital media is priced correctly and readily available - along with trial versions of software. The collectors amongst us will continue to buy physical media so long as it is made more appealing.

As for this thread.. I believe it's important that people always have the choice over internet/digital and physical media / non internet. The more choices a person has, the more likely they will make a purchase. Isolating your product to just one market when there's really no need to, is by all means a bad business decision. So they are the ones who will suffer, via reduced sales.

 

[BiG D]

Again, no arguement about the effectiveness of DRM, but it IS a direct response to piracy and as such "fighting back" by pirating games is a terrible plan.

 

[thatbloke]

Regardless of its effectiveness, pirating games to prove a point about how sucky the DRM is is not the right solution.

The right solution is to not purchase the game at all, but only a minority of people will actually go down that route, because otherwise they won't get the new game at all! So they put up with it.

A phrase frequently used here is "People telling me how to play my games." The games aren't yours until you buy them...

 

[Zooggy]

Ahey,

If one slightly re-interprets what TB says, one can read it instead as a way of looking at taking power back through passionate activism. Imagine that instead of telling people "see, your choices suck ass" we tell them "hey, look, there's something wrong about this and here's what we can do about it".

[...]

It's activism to encourage support to create and direct the power of collective action. It's not that we're more "right" nor that our choices are somehow more "correct". It's that we're right for us and that we believe that others would be with us if only they could find and identify with our cause.

I had to read your post twice to truly grasp my head around it.

After much pondering, I have to say that I endorse your thoughts and have re-formatted my reading of blokey's post accordingly.

Cheers,
J.

 

[KillCrazy]

Isn't trying before buying what demos are made for?

 

[thatbloke]

Isn't trying before buying what demos are made for?

That's kinda the thing here.

Maybe more developers/publishers could be more forthcoming with their demos but they are out there.

 

[Silk]

Again, no arguement about the effectiveness of DRM, but it IS a direct response to piracy and as such "fighting back" by pirating games is a terrible plan.

I don't, I've been tempted but in the end I snub them instead. Either way, a lost sale to them.

 

[thatbloke]

I don't, I've been tempted but in the end I snub them instead. Either way, a lost sale to them.

And that's entirely the point I was trying to make - there are not enough of us who will actually stand our ground and not buy it to make a difference to the publisher.

If we could get more people on our side, and inform them in a way that they understand, i.e. "Hey, we think this is a bad idea, here's why..." then maybe with enough of a loss in sales they might realise that doing something like this will cause problems with their potential userbase.

If, after seeing the facts, people don't care, or are too fanboyish to care and just want their new game (read: MW2) then there really isn't a huge amount that can be done about it and those of us who protest will be left behind.

 

[SwampFae]

For thos seekin more info on DRM. See this link.

(Would not take everything said on that page overly seriously, though.)
Just a little bit to fuel this fiery red-hot discussion*snickers*

 

[Zhinrak]

Isn't trying before buying what demos are made for?

And there is a surprising lack of game demo's out there.

i have pirated a lot of games in my time, i wont lie or try to hide it. The main reason for me pirating these games is mainly due to the fact i don't want to spend £20-£30 on a game to find i don't like it or for some unseen reason it doesn't work on my PC and end up stuck with it because most game stores have a strict no return policy on PC games.

Thats why i do it, not me trying to validate it and say i'm right in doing so. Most games i'm interested do not have a playable demo and i have to rely on reviews as a result.

The main problem with this sort of DRM is that i know someone somewhere WILL pirate it and WILL find a way to make it playable offline without this validation rubbish. Heck this bullshit they are throwing onto games is why alot of people i know pirate more games. I know a scary amount of people who pirated spore simple because the pirated version did not require registration and didnt have install limits. As mentioned above a lot of this DRM is extra added hassle for honest customers who are buying these games legit, while people who know how to work their magic are going to pirate the game, spend no money on it and avoid most the hassle.

Thankfully i dont care much for most of ubisoft games, but still in my opinion its a step in the wrong direction. I can see what they are trying to do, but they are going about it the wrong way.

 

[BiG D]

most game stores have a strict no return policy on PC games.

And, to ask this question again, anyone want to speculate why that is?

 

[Panda with issues...]

All spent up? Join a library.

Books rock.

 

[Silk]

And, to ask this question again, anyone want to speculate why that is?

... Because people have no idea how to tackle piracy

This one has a simple solution - all PC games should have their activation key covered over, i.e. like a scratch card. If broken, the game can't be returned. If not, it can.

The game activation key should by standard always be requested after installation, i.e. after the game launches for the first time without error. That way if the game doesn't work or is a duplicate gift, the customer can take it back.

DRM and game refunds being refused just encourages piracy. It seems nobody can be arsed to think of the correct way to try reduce piracy, instead they just shoot themselves in the foot and kill off their own industry by half baked, half assed ideas that actually have the opposite effect of what they are trying to achieve.

Using music as another example of them just doing it wrong. For the first time ever, I decided to BUY an album digitally. Never been able to get it working properly - always downloads double files to my nokia, and won't download at all in Win 7. So I deleted the legit copy, and downloaded the mp3's illegally. And have continued to do so ever since.

 

[Silk]

As for PC games needing a CD key in the first place.. I honestly think that if somebody took the brave step of completely removing this, i.e. making it more like the console market where PC games can be traded in, then it would reduce piracy and go a long way towards making the market boom again.

It'd make retailers happy as they get most of their revenue from trade ins these days anyway.

And when the retailers become almost completely dependant on trade-ins, with only the shiny stuff sold new, like special boxed sets people will pay for.. then in turn the digital prices of software can be dropped, encouraging legit PC gaming even more.

And the software devs can relax a little, as they can stop worrying about the extra costs associated with software protection.

 

[Taffy]

At the end of the day, the 'criminal' (in this scenario the pirates) will always have the upper hand and the victim/enforcer (in this case the game producers) will always be playing catch-up. Piracy will never be eliminated. The best outcome is that developers find a way to combat it effectively without harming the legitimate owner or taking away their ability to return games if they don't work on their rig etc.

I'm willing to bet that a good proportion of people who use pirated copies of games have a little technical know-how and understand the harm of DRM etc. If such 'solutions' weren't employed, demos were once again wide-spread (to give people the 'try-before-you-buy' option) and people could return the game if it didn't work or was just God awful, chances are PC game piracy would become less prolific.

And if some developers suffered because people played the demos and decided they didn't like the game, then maybe they would be forced to stop selling crappy games in the first place and concentrate on the good stuff, resulting in a happy consumer and boosted sales.

To sum up:
Good game-DRM+demo+right to return=
Rubbish game+DRM-demo-right to return=

 

[VibroAxe]

A little late to the party on this one, but my main issue with mandating internet access is the main reason I will play a game that isn't online is because my internet connection isn't available for some reason.

For example: the only reason I started playing the Cod MW2 single player was that I had no internet and wanted to play a game. According to Ubisoft this I am no longer allowed to do.

So I guess my answer would be this, if it's a primarly online/network game then I have no issue with it requiring an internet connection. But if the game is marketing itself as primarily single player with a multiplayer content, then tbh, I'm not buying

 

[PsiSoldier]

Necro, however! - http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=235290&site=pcg

 

[thatbloke]

This is going to be the death of PC gaming as we know it, to be quite frank.

This DRM will be cracked/spoofed in some way, just like every single other type of DRM.

Then people will use the cracked version, then the publishers will cite "high piracy levels" as a reason not to touch the PC at all.

idiots.

 

[Haven]

Meh feck that then - I'll wait for the haxxored version to come out.