next »

[Fallsburg]

Read here.  I would recommend actually reading the paper for those interested in economic game theory.

While they don't say that DRM is always bad, they do definitively prove that the removal of DRM doesn't necessarily increase the amount of piracy.

Thoughts?

[Schwiggy]

Seth Godin has also mentioned DRM in several of his blog posts. The thing is, it doesn't actually cost us if someone pirates a game. That's because they aren't physically stealing something of value to us, only a potential sale - if they really were going to buy it, and they still can.
And if a game is being pirated it also means the game is being shared, publicized, etc. It's almost a win-win situation, but I think all of us have this little fear of living in a cardboard box on the side of the road saying, "I made that game," as some punk kids walk by playing it and laugh at the crazy guy. Everyone is playing, but no one is paying. (slight exaggeration  )
But even if everyone pirated your game - literally, every one. No one bought it.
If it was good they will still look to you for another game. And you'll make money on that.

The way I look at it is: Piracy is not the biggest problem for an indie; marketing is.

[eclectocrat]

The way I look at it is: Piracy is not the biggest problem for an indie; marketing is.

Yo!

I told my girlfriend that I'm releasing my game free for Mac/PC and charging a small fee on iOS/Android. She said she wouldn't buy it if she could get it for free, and I pointed out that she's not a game customer. She pirates everything. I can't lose a customer that I never had.

[Christian Knudsen]

But even if everyone pirated your game - literally, every one. No one bought it.
If it was good they will still look to you for another game (which you won't be able to make because you made no money on your first game). And you'll make money on that (no you won't -- everybody will just pirate that one as well).

[Falmil]

Really, it seems like one of the best thing you can do is to form a strong community around your game(s) to the point where people actually want to buy your game and support you. You just need more incentives to purchase.

[Fallsburg]

Well, the main takeaways that I had from the paper:

1) Piracy is always going to happen.  Some people just prefer to pirate.
2) DRM will never stop piracy. 
3) Even if your DRM is perfect (in terms of annoyance to the paying consumer), it still comes with a cost


The interesting thing that the paper only pays lip service to (and I hope they get into in further papers) is the network externalities created by piracy.  For those who are uninformed an example of a network externality in action can be seen in the old VHS vs. BetaMax (or for the younger crowd, BluRay vs HDDVD).  VHS was a worse format than BetaMax in most categories (technologically), but VHS had better adoption rates.  Once VHS got a little bit ahead, it made sense for film makers to release on VHS as VHS had more users.  This meant that users were more likely to buy VHS players as VHS had more movies available. ad infinitum

What I'm getting at is: I want to see the cold, hard analysis on how piracy helps games. e.g. spreads the word, has people try before they buy, etc.   

[trq]

Does anyone know an example of game which was fully protected from crackers?
DRM only makes cracked games being glitchy and people think it's original game is bugged

[Christian Knudsen]

The point of DRM isn't to be fully protected indefinitely. It's just to protect the game for the first few weeks following release, since that's where most AAA games make the majority of their profits.

[Falmil]

I don't think everybody knows that.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

there's a comic i saw once which was like 'why do game companies keep making their games easier and more casual? why!?' and then someone else was like 'because the hardcore don't buy games anymore, they just steal them' -- which seems true to me. pirates are disproportionately the hardcore, and this leads to hardcore games being less profitable than casual games

or more precisely, games gradually become focused towards appealing those few pc gamers who pay for games, rather than the majority who don't, since the only feedback the game companies get is what sells and what does not sell, not what is widely played and what is not widely played

[cliffski]

What paul said.

I don't think it's a surprise that there is a big push to social games, online-games, and games where the main thrust of it is playing online against or alongside other people.
Any excuse to have an account, an account that can be terminated if shared or copied.

The #1 most angry, ranting frothing arguments about how games are shit, are on warez forums, where people try to use it as an excuse to pirate (the games all suck!), but in reality, all they are doing is acting as evidence that nobody makes games for pirates. Why would they?

The only way you can make games better as a gamer is by buying the ones you like. All the petitions and internet whining in the galaxy will not hold as much weight as a profitable game.