Quote:
Originally Posted by Hood
There's nothing wrong with DRM if it means that the developers get paid the money they should receive. Yes its inconvenient for us, and yes it means those with dial up may suffer, and yes it means that some won't buy the game. The flip side is that the developers get paid and they keep producing great games for the majority us to play.
Don't forget that DRM is only a response to software piracy and without one the other wouldn't be needed. Not everyone is a software pirate but everyone has the potential to be one, and DRM removes the temptation.
If you won't buy a game because of DRM then that is your choice and of course you're entitled to follow that course of action. I think you'll be left behind though. I'm just hoping that if DRM is implemented that it isn't done so in an obstructive way.
Hood
|
So, if people with flaky connections suffer and some don't buy the game, how does less sales overall ensure the developers getting paid for their work? By losing guaranteed sales through focusing on deterring people that never will constitute a sale? Without DRM you lose money due to pirates. With DRM you still lose money due to pirates (because nothing ever stays uncracked if it attracts their interest), but on top of that you also lose money by disgruntled would-be buyers. How is that making sure the developers will get paid? Sorry, i'm confused.
Actually, this is all about preventing you from second-hand selling your games, much to the publisher's delight and benefit. The publisher's, not the developer's.
Which begs a further question i'd very much like to have answered but none of us probably will...how much of those 60 Euros a new game costs actually goes to the developer's pocket and how much is gobbled up by the publishers? I'd guess a pretty substantial amount, since it's what actually pays for the advertising campaigns and they also want to make a hefty profit too. It happens in the music industry as well and just like they broughts us DRM and are now abandoning it, it could possibly be the same way on the PC.
I once watched a guy's interview on the English speaking Russia Today channel, the guy is not an industry name but he's rich enough to build an orphanage in Afghanistan out of his own pocket. Journalist asks him why he's an independent artist without a publishing record label and after stating his activist/political opinion he also adds "and let's be honest here...i earn way more than i would if i was signed for 10 or 20 cents per disc sold".
The problem with this is not people getting paid for their work, that's fine. The problem is that on a sale of a certain item (a music record or a piece of software), people who have no connection whatsoever to its actual development and creation end up gobbling up the lion's share of the budget because of having to pay for over-advertising on one hand and being greedy on the other. Meanwhile, the creators get bread crumps while the publisher damages the creator-customer/fan relationship by imposing artificial restrictions on legitimate customers just so they won't be able to re-sell what they bought and cut into their profits. Pretty selfish on their behalf being such bad people towards both the artists and the fans, don't you think?
Why do you think 1c will self-publish in Russia?
I hope they have chosen some small, independent, flight-sim specific publisher for Europe.
Aerosoft for example would be a very good choice. They published RoF in Europe and are also going to do the same for Jet Thunder (the upcoming Falklands sim), plus they are heavily into MSFS add-ons so they might be able to do some for SoW as well.
Anyway, i guess we can't change anything at this point, but objections have to be aired. We're the ones who will buy this game, recommend it to our friends and buy a second copy as a present for our dad, so i'd say we have a say in things. If not for how this title will be handled, then to prevent possibly bad things happening in the future ones.