next »

[Pineapple]

I just bought a game off Steam that uses Games for Windows Live as a sort of DRM. You have to be logged in to play the game properly. I am unable to log in to my GfWL account because certain ports that I cannot, as an individual, forward, have to be forwarded. So I specifically paid to be able to play this game, and GfWL DRM is preventing me from doing so. There's got to be something illegal about that.

We as gamers really need to take a stand against DRM; this shit is getting old.

[Melly]

Was the DRM detailed on the game's store page on Steam? I think it usually details requirements like that.

But I agree, this kind of DRM is just plain bullshit. I wonder how much this actually hurts the publisher instead of help them.

[PaleFox]

That can happen to Steam games too. They too need certain port ranges to connect to Steam, although you can go into offline mode in Steam to avoid this.

[Ben_Hurr]

Was the DRM detailed on the game's store page on Steam? I think it usually details requirements like that.

But I agree, this kind of DRM is just plain bullshit. I wonder how much this actually hurts the publisher instead of help them.

I don't know, buying something then being unable to use it because the manufacturer is a buffoon kind of steers me away from buying from them again.  Especially if you can't return said thing. 

[jwk5]

What I love about DRM is that all it really does is make things difficult for the honest customers, the dishonest ones will have cracks and other means of bypassing the DRM so not only do they get the product for free they also get it with little to no hassle. Irony.

I think developing customer loyalty goes a lot further than DRM does in terms of combating piracy.

[LemonScented]

I don't know, buying something then being unable to use it because the manufacturer is a buffoon kind of steers me away from buying from them again.  Especially if you can't return said thing. 

Speaking of which, how does Steam work in terms of refunds? I've never tried to get a refund for a game I've bought via Steam, but Valve would seem to be on shaky legal ground if they don't have a way of returning stuff within a reasonable period of time.

I think developing customer loyalty goes a lot further than DRM does in terms of combating piracy.

I'll go you one further and say that DRM is actively encouraging the spread of piracy. In MadK's case, for instance, if he can't get a refund (as I say, I don't know if he can or not), then what option does he have but to get a cracked copy? And of course whichever developer it was who was retarded enough to put GfWL into their game will scour the torrent sites, see the figures and conclude that the dirty pirates are STILL causing them lost sales and "stealing" their product, and will try to enforce something even more draconian next time.

[s0]

What I love about DRM is that all it really does is make things difficult for the honest customers, the dishonest ones will have cracks and other means of bypassing the DRM so not only do they get the product for free they also get it with little to no hassle. Irony.

I use cracks even for games I buy legitimately...

Anyway, I think what publishers really need to do is compete with the pirates in their own territory, e.g. cut down on prices, offer fast and reliable download services, and of course, get rid of DRM. They need to make buying games easier than pirating them again. Steam et al are going in the right direction with their sales and cheap game packs, but they still use both DRM and (most of the time) current retail prices.

I read somewhere that you could, in theory, sell a new AAA game for $20 on a download platform and still make the same profit, due to lack of manufacturing and distribution costs. The only reason publishers aren't doing that yet is that they still need retailers as an  important promotional tool.

[Richard Kain]

It is not illegal. It is extremely annoying, but it is not illegal. Caveat Emptor. Let the buyer beware. Those sorts of details are usually spelled out in the EULA. If it was never communicated to you ahead of time that you needed a GFWL account to play the game, you might be able to convince Steam to refund your purchase. (and remove the game from your Steam list) That is something you would have to take up with Steam customer service.

Steam can track a LOT of your stats for any game you play, so I would imagine they would be a lot more forgiving on this sort of mix-up. They can just punch up your profile and see how much time you've spent playing the game. If you call up Steam customer service and ask for a refund on a game that they can tell you haven't played yet, I imagine they would be willing to meet you halfway on it. Perhaps they will agree to swap it out for a different game of equal or lesser monetary value.

Personally I avoid any Games For Windows Live titles like the plague. I have no problem with Steam and their method of DRM. They are an established system that has most of their bugs worked out nicely. (and are cross-platform to boot) GFWL is still a fledgling system that does not have wide developer adoption, and frankly just doesn't measure up to Steam.

[Conker534]

I'm going to google what DRM is..

[Pineapple]

https://support.steampowered.com/kb_article.php?ref=4938-WTDF-9465

As with most software products, we will not offer refunds for purchases made online as outlined in the software license - please review Section 4 of the Steam Subscriber Agreement for more information.

I'm contacting support to see if they will swap it out for a game of equal/lesser value

[fraxcell]

Anyway, I think what publishers really need to do is compete with the pirates in their own territory, e.g. cut down on prices, offer fast and reliable download services, and of course, get rid of DRM. They need to make buying games easier than pirating them again.

I totally agree. I think Wolfire did a wonderful job of this with the Humble Indie Bundle. They literally did everything they could to make it easy to buy, to the point of giving away free copies to people who weren't able to pay for it. In return, they made almost two million dollars, gained a lot of popularity, and probably drastically reduced piracy.
Companies like Ubisoft on the other hand, encourage piracy with awful DRM, where it seems like some people take pride in pirating their games, just to show them how stupid their system is.

[SirNiko]

This is another reason why piracy is so popular - once you're used to scouring pirate sites for illegal software, it's just easier and more convenient to go there to find copies of games. You're developing habits in gamers they must break to give you money.

Sadly, there is little you can do to prove how DRM effects sales. Perhaps if you had two identical markets and released a version in each territory somehow, one with DRM and one without, you could measure the difference, but ultimately the data is screwy enough you could claim whatever you want about whether or not it matters. Game releases are just not repeatable.

[s0]

I totally agree. I think Wolfire did a wonderful job of this with the Humble Indie Bundle. They literally did everything they could to make it easy to buy, to the point of giving away free copies to people who weren't able to pay for it. In return, they made almost two million dollars, gained a lot of popularity, and probably drastically reduced piracy.

I agree, but I'm not sure if if a "Humble AAA Bundle" would work as well. A lot of the appeal in actually paying for the indie bundle lies in "supporting" indie devs. No one really wants to "support" EA or Ubisoft. They could try pushing the charity angle more though.
 

[dEnamed]

Steam generally states they don't do refunds. In my experiences however they actually do so.

When the game is unplayable for actual reasons, including:
- Massive technical problems prevents you from playing.
- You've got a good reason why.
- You say pretty please with a sugercoating on top.

I've had two cases of something gone bad (Saints Row II and Prototype) in both cases I was refunded and in both cases Steam states "This is an exception and you can't rely for it to happen again". If in doubt, just give it a try, be calm, be friendly and informative.


---

Onto the topic of DRM -
I almost bought AC2 this sale - until I remembered the DRM. The thing is, I want that game. I'd really love to play it but I won't as long as that draconic thing is part of the game. One lost sale, like they even care or notice - and if they notice they'll probably chalk it up to "one less sale? MUST BE A PIRATE!".
Another example, I bought the Dragon Age Ultimate Edition. I was happy. Until I wasted two entire afternoons getting the bloody DLCs to work because their external "DLC Update Service" wasn't starting properly on my computer. Argh.

[Richard Kain]

Companies like Ubisoft on the other hand, encourage piracy with awful DRM, where it seems like some people take pride in pirating their games, just to show them how stupid their system is.

This is not really a valid argument for preventing piracy. Those individuals who actively "crack" games for the challenge aren't really a problem from a financial perspective. The average user doesn't have the technical prowess to circumvent software DRM. And the small number of programmers who DO have that level of technical expertise aren't really an issue either, since they usually have to purchase a copy before they can begin work on cracking it.

No, the real issue with piracy is how easy it is to get access to software that other people have already cracked. It is true that releasing a game with zero DRM solves the issue of people cracking it. But it doesn't address the issue of people redistributing it without paying for it. It only takes one person to start indiscriminately seeding the software.

On-line focused systems like Steam and Battle.NET are one of the most popular solutions of DRM. They allow the publishers to keep tabs on the digital games they sell, while at the same time enhancing the player's experience with attractive additional features. The publisher gets to keep their eye on things, and the loyal paying customers are rewarded with additional connected community features. There is a certain give-and-take from both sides, and an equitable compromise is reached.

For smaller indie titles, the marketing route might be a viable option in the future. Selling tangible goods in conjunction with a free game is a possible way to make money. Producing T-shirts, tie-in novels, and other tangible materials, and then using a free game to promote them and the IP they use, might be possible. (as long as the production budget for the game is within reasonable limits) People who aren't willing to pay $5 for a downloadable game would be willing to shell out $15 - $20 for a T-shirt with a character they like on it. It doesn't make a lot of sense, but there you have it.

[speeder]

Actually, in several countries that kind of DRM is illegal, or when it is not, you are legally allowed to crack it.

The US is the single exception, where exists a law that encourage DRM and allow arresting of anyone that can figure how a DRM work without being the author (the DMCA, that for example allowed a russian math guy to get arrested when he entered the US to speak about math).

[ink.inc]

The US is the single exception, where exists a law that encourage DRM and allow arresting of anyone that can figure how a DRM work without being the author (the DMCA, that for example allowed a russian math guy to get arrested when he entered the US to speak about math).

I wasn't aware of this. Do you have any links? Sources?

[speeder]

Yes, just look at the law itself...

Or the famous complaint of this guy:

http://www.macfergus.com/niels/dmca/cia.html

[RCIX]

Anyway, I think what publishers really need to do is compete with the pirates in their own territory, e.g. cut down on prices, offer fast and reliable download services, and of course, get rid of DRM. They need to make buying games easier than pirating them again. Steam et al are going in the right direction with their sales and cheap game packs, but they still use both DRM and (most of the time) current retail prices.

Well, i think that's sort of what steam is supposed to be. But somehow now, a lot of people (i'm betting that vocal internet minority) are crying DRM over steam, when it really feels like one of those few non-intrusive versions of DRM that i really don't mind. Now, when a publisher sticks their own DRM on top of steam's..... Thank god Ubisoft didn't do that for RUSE!

And then there's Desura.

[s0]

Steam DRM is occasionally obtrusive though. It occasionally refuses to start in offline mode, for instance, which is kind of a pain when you're in an internet-less place with a laptop.

Still much better than Ubi DRM of course.