An Interview with Oleg

[Letum]

Oh no...I hope this doesn't mean things will go down the Silent Hunter 5 plug hole.

[zauii]

Originally Posted by Untamo

Yes, I agree it's a problem, but dealing with it is an even bigger problem and I see it as a futile one. There aren't many examples of games that haven't been cracked and pirated. So, my opinion is that it's better to just ignore the pirates and focus on serving the PAYING customers.

Plus: It's a growing trend to crack games just because they have anti-piracy systems in them (to remove the invasive protection systems, to relieve one of putting the cd in and such).

Splinter Cell Chaos Theory is the longest standing.
It took over a year to get a proper crack out there.(422 days) Yes UBI did succeed once...

^ Todd Ciolek (2009-06-16). "Interview: The Return Of... StarForce?". Gamasutra. http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/new...hp?story=24035. "Everybody remembers Ubisoft’s Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory. It held for 422 days without a piracy crack. This world record for AAA-class games is still unbeaten and no other solutions managed to make a game last longer."

[Blackdog_kt]

In one of Oleg's simHQ interviews i somehow got the idea that he's not really keen on these methods. I could live with a one-time online activation that i can transfer to a new PC/OS at my leisure, something that's tied to a gmail account for example.

However, limited activations/deactivations and constant connectivity is a no go for me. There are quite a few titles i didn't buy because of this, as well as some that I wait until they are cracked first and then i buy them.

Silent Hunter 5 for example. I didn't buy it, but now that it's cracked and i can play at my own leisure, i'm thinking of picking it up. Aside from the irony however (if people need cracks before they buy the game, it's like pirates making them money), it's obvious what that does for the title's success. By the time i get SH5 its price will probably have dropped from 50 to 30 Euros, maybe even less. Not to mention it's unfinished state at release made me think "i'll wait 6 months for mods and patches", by which time i could be occupied with something else and skip it completely.

Similarly, RoF i could have been suckered into buying if it wasn't for the always online thing. By the time it got dropped (partially dropped actually), the rest of the game's shortcomings had been so well documented that i decided i'm not going to buy it regardless of copy protection. Chalk up one more lost sale thanks to DRM. It gave me reason to pause and a chance to see beyond the protection and into all the other things i equally disliked about its game design decisions. Essentially, that's killing off impulse buying. With Starcraft 2 and SoW around the corner, i have no use for RoF.

These so called protection schemes only present challenges for hackers (they do it out of competition between hacker groups most of the times), they make the game unplayable for a few days/weeks for people who will not buy it anyway (aka they are not lost sales if the DRM can't force them to buy it), and to top it all off they make it a hindrance for legitimate buyers, who will hold off on their purchase until it's in the bargain bin. And here lies the million dollar question. Is it worth it turning away the people who want to give you money, just to spite the ones who will never give you any money anyway, for a few weeks tops?

[Icewolf]

This would be impossible considering the numbers and locations but as an example I use a business software that generates a code number everytime it is installed and to activate it, I must phone this code number into their office ,they then give me an activation code that I must manually type into an activation box.

[Feuerfalke]

Originally Posted by baronWastelan

Protect the game by physical means www.microcosm.co.uk/dongles.php

Yes, that's physical protection as well. Several CAD and 3D-Tools use that for years. As long as there is a software checking for the dongle, the software can be modified.

[Qpassa]

Originally Posted by Icewolf

This would be impossible considering the numbers and locations but as an example I use a business software that generates a code number everytime it is installed and to activate it, I must phone this code number into their office ,they then give me an activation code that I must manually type into an activation box.

photoshop uses some similar protection and have been hacked...

[WTE_Galway]

Oh well ... my gaming machine is offline.

I don't even fly FSX (with its one off activation) because its too much hassle to renew the activation.

The assumption that everyone that buys games is online is actually unfounded.

[zauii]

Been waiting way to long for this baby to care if it has online activation or whatever.. i am not missing out.
Sure if you live under circumstances where you've no decent connection options you can be worried but otherwise, just about any modern society has broadband.
Frankly it's not more than right that the developers exploit their right to protect their games, even if it's via online activation you do accept the terms when you buy the game.

The whole shenanigan about "We're not physically owning it then" Is just child's play, this has been done since 10 years back, besides a 40-50$ dollar investment ain't gonna cost you your life is it?
If it is maybe you should reconsider gaming at all...

[Blackdog_kt]

It's not about shennanigans actually, it's about options, rewarding what we consider good game design and the publisher rewarding his customers in return. If i have to accept a constant connectivity requirement with all the potentiall technical problems it poses, then the game better have some pretty funky features tied to that online protection scheme.

I used to play an MMO game which is, of course, always online. I accepted the risk of downtime because the connectivity requirement gave me so much in return, plus the company reimbursed its customers with extra subscription time if downtime was their fault. Heck, the connectivity requirement was in fact the entire game and it was a rich, varied and very competitive experience far and away ahead of everything i've seen in multiplayer in my life.

However, if a developer spends 30% of his total budget on implementing DRM that targets the non-buyers, instead of spending it on features to please the buyers, then that's a developer i refuse to reward with my cash, at least until workarounds surface that enable me to use the software with the least amount of possible overhead and things that could go wrong.

By that time the game is a lot cheaper too, which in the end evens out pretty nicely. If they force me to hunt for illegal modifications before their game is playable, then it's only fair that i'll pick it up at a reduced price. It's not like i'm stealing after all, a game that i buy is mine and i can do whatever i want with it. The EULA might say otherwise but EULAs rarely hold against consumer laws in any EU court anyway, so if i buy the game i can mod/hack it or do whatever else i want with it, as long as i'm not reselling modified copies and pretending it's my original work. If i buy a car that runs on unleaded and i want to try running it on 110 octane avgas that's my right to do so, it's the same with computer games.

I think the main drive behind DRM is not limiting piracy, it's limiting second hand sales, which is again a violation of most established consumer laws and ethics. If i buy it it's mine to use, change (as long as i don't redistribute it for monetary gain), donate and resell, end of the story. That's what DRM targets primarily and tries to change.
What they can't grasp is that they will never be able to totally control this, because legitimate buyers can just as well use modifications to circumvent the publisher's infringement on their consumer rights. They are essentially throwing money down the drain instead of using them on cooler stuff, like a fat, printed manual that actually documents the game's features like in the old days, or an extended storyline arc instead of the "weekend wonder" gameplay spans that some of the new games have.

Let them do what they want, we can still vote with our wallets and mod the heck out of anything we don't like.

[Untamo]

+1 @ Blackdog's comments.