A refreshing take on PC games piracy..

dangel · 27-03-2008, 02:46 PM

..ignore the pirates and concentrate on customers

PC game developer has radical message: ignore the pirates

Heresy for some of you? Or is it just common sense?

Copy protection annoys the heck out of me as a legit customer personally.

kreeeee · 27-03-2008, 08:35 PM

Originally Posted by dangel

..ignore the pirates and concentrate on customers

PC game developer has radical message: ignore the pirates

Heresy for some of you? Or is it just common sense?

Copy protection annoys the heck out of me as a legit customer personally.

Put it this way... since play.com have offered their music download service that makes it quicker and easier to get high quality music compared to piracy I haven't illegally downloaded a single song.

I see a similar thing happening with games.

dangel · 28-03-2008, 08:41 AM

Thinking about music - we've gone from horrible DRM to DRM-free - can the same happen for gaming too?

I honestly agree with the idea that pirates aren't lost customers - they probably wouldn't buy your product at any price.

mycarsavw · 28-03-2008, 09:03 AM

"The reason why we don't put copy protection on our games isn't because we're nice guys. We do it because the people who actually buy games don't like to mess with it. Our customers make the rules, not the pirates. Pirates don't count," Wardell argues. "When Sins popped up as the #1 best selling game at retail a couple weeks ago, a game that has no copy protect whatsoever, that should tell you that piracy is not the primary issue."

Spot on.

Betty_Swallocks · 28-03-2008, 12:41 PM

At last someone speaking sense.

There are companies whose products I will not buy at any price because I have had such problems with their oppressive copy protection in the past. Codemasters springs to mind.

All the copy protection does is slow the pirates down a bit anyway. Look at Assassins Creed. There are cracks out for that already and the game hasn't even been released yet.

Long after the pirates have played the game through regular decent honest customers will be suffering from the instabilities caused by the copy protections though.

The last Codemasters game I bought forced me to replace a perfectly serviceable DVD drive because the copy protection refuesed to recognise it.

SmileyUK · 28-03-2008, 01:58 PM

hmm i wonder if stardock made a massively anticipated fps then only got 1/10 or so of sales to theft ratio whether he would feel the same (if rumours are true) . He has made a game that is typically suited to an older audience meaning he is much less likely to get piracy due to the stronger moral stance of an older generation. Also the budget difference between sins and cod4 must be huge meaning 200k sales for him is good, for cod 4 it would have been a disaster.

I will agree that codemasters copy protection is pretty extreme and in general copy protection isnt proving effective. They need to work on a more ingenious way of doing it, rather than removing it entirely though i feel.

At the moment the consoles are just proving a better platform for selling your wares though as piracy rates are much lower and a much safer bet at getting a return on your investment. (based on an opinion rather than a fact though)

GoNz0 · 28-03-2008, 02:03 PM

i thought steam would have the market for this..

yeh you have to wait to download it, but thats often faster and more convenient than popping into town and trying to fight your way round GAME full of sweaty under 16's counting pocket money.

only problem with steam is there are stupid enough to out price most of there games.. then you have to wait all week for amazons super saver delivery to get it at a decent price !

dangel · 28-03-2008, 02:18 PM

Originally Posted by SmileyUK

I will agree that codemasters copy protection is pretty extreme and in general copy protection isnt proving effective. They need to work on a more ingenious way of doing it, rather than removing it entirely though i feel.

I think easily the best 'protection' is to add good online content and multiplayer which requires authentication servers. Adding invasive, retarded and expensive protection to games just pisses off your paying customers. The best you can hope it does it delay the pirates and the whole point here is they aren't going to pay up anyway.

The industry punts lots of stats around about piracy - none of which are based on anything but pure speculation IMHO.

Sidenote - assassins creed retail has not been pirated as the copy floating round is fatally bugged (apparently). My copy's still on pre-order.

MaddAussie · 28-03-2008, 02:28 PM

I agree that copy protection isn't the way forward, I wonder how much of the development costs go on protection? The hacker will always find a way round the protection. Look at the music industry in the late 60's they where saying the advent of the cassette tape was gonna kill of the record industry, it didnt and tbh MP3 wont now.

And I doubt many of those COD4 sales where on PC

matty-hodgson · 28-03-2008, 02:42 PM

i totally disagree with all piracy!
i pay 8.99 a month for a Napster account and buy all my games legitametly, sometimes from treeBay so i get them cheaper but i still buy the actual CD.

and i also totally disagree with 'i downloaded it to see if i liked it, then i'll buy it if i like it'
so you complete the game, decide you like it, then go and buy it?
i don't get it..

SmileyUK · 28-03-2008, 03:24 PM

problem is though dangel, even where authentication servers are involved. people set up private ones (wow being the example). But in their case it really doesnt matter so much because not many people have server hardware to run decent sized private servers and they have such a huge userbase the few that dont pay dont really matter.

dangel · 28-03-2008, 03:39 PM

Originally Posted by SmileyUK

problem is though dangel, even where authentication servers are involved. people set up private ones (wow being the example). But in their case it really doesnt matter so much because not many people have server hardware to run decent sized private servers and they have such a huge userbase the few that dont pay dont really matter.

Think you answered it yourself there - it's not the same thing as the 'full' online experience. Also, people don't want hassle - be it hacking game servers to work for their l33t buddies or even installing (and running) legit games. I've lost count of how many times i've seen something on steam and thought 'meh why not?' and clicked to buy - it's just so covenient (so long as it's reasonably priced).

Make me good games and i'll buy them. As will many others.

scarbunny · 28-03-2008, 04:00 PM

I really disagree that Steam is the way forward, I have had such problems with Steam games that it has put me off for ever.

The prime example being HL2 I bought a physical copy it took me over 5 hours of pissing around to even get it running. To top it off my friend who downloaded a pirate copy rang me half way through my pain saying he had been playing for a few hours and the game was amazing, after all that I didnt even enjoy the game.

I really think copy protection is a waste of time and really only hurts the customer, I am a member of a Warez site and I have never seen a game that wasnt cracked on release. The game that took the longest was Bioshock but that was still cracked after a week or so.

Before you say it no I dont think protection is bad because as an occasional pirate it makes my life diffecult it dosnt, its because as an occasional game buyer it makes my life diffecult

I do angree that a pirated game isnt a lost sale, I have downloaded stuff I have no intention of buying just to see what the hype is about, Crysis for example, but if I want a game ill buy it, Assasins Creed, FFOW, STALKER for example.

On a side note I will never be a fan of DD, i want something real for my money, unless it is stupidly cheap, which it never is I remmeber seeing Bioshock for something like £45 on steam when it was only £17.99 on Play.com

dangel · 28-03-2008, 04:10 PM

Originally Posted by scarbunny

The game that took the longest was Bioshock but that was still cracked after a week or so.

Splinter Cell Chaos Theory in the bad old days of starforce took ages - come to think of it for a while starforce really did stop the pirates (because it was written by ex-pirates). Sadly it also (apparently) killed drives or didn't work for legit consumers. Oh and it was a root kit.

Originally Posted by scarbunny

On a side note I will never be a fan of DD, i want something real for my money, unless it is stupidly cheap, which it never is I remmeber seeing Bioshock for something like £45 on steam when it was only £17.99 on Play.com

Yeah it's annoying how Steam is (probably) hamstrung by traditional publishers forcing them to keep prices up. Or they're greedy. One of them I guess

usxhe190 · 28-03-2008, 04:19 PM

totally agree with dangel.

If developers are smart about it:

1. they would remove copyright protection altogether
2. limit online multiplayer by putting a cd key (sure, people might pirate on individuals server but the "experience" is different)
3. actually entice people to buy the original by giving "original accessories" to create an experience with buying the game (not just the DVD/CD).

but hey, developers always think they can win against piracy - instead the end law abiding customer is shafted YET AGAIN with a complex anti0-piracy system.

SmileyUK · 28-03-2008, 04:43 PM

thinking about it, a combination of cd key and official servers only would work nicely.But the cost of running those servers would have to be put onto the customer in the form of monthly subs. Most clans wouldnt complain too much anyway as they pay for their own servers, but a lot of casuals might not be so keen as they may play 10 different games and 10 different sub costs would add up!