Piracy is not killing PC games

[Quantum Windbag]

Gaming companies are.

When it comes to DRM, nothing is more annoying and hated than DRM that requires a constant internet connection. This DRM regularly pings a server controlled by the creator of the game in order to prove that you, the paying customer who paid money to buy the game, are not a dirty pirate. One of the loudest critiques of this type of DRM is what happens when the DRM cannot make the connection to the server. We have already seen what happens to Ubisoft games when there is an unexpected server crash. Gamers weren't too thrilled about that. Now we learn that Ubisoft is looking to give its paying customers another look into why such DRM systems are a real bad idea. Ubisoft will be taking its authentication servers down on Tuesday, February 7th for an unspecified amount of time.

While Ubisoft takes its servers down to migrate them, gamers who paid good money in order to play DRM'ed games will be unable to do so. What makes this worse is that all those pirates that this DRM was supposedly going to stop will be able to play those games all they want during the migration. This is the thanks that paying customers get. This is the thanks that fans that want to support Ubisoft in its PC gaming endeavors get for their loyalty. When it comes time for Ubisoft to go to bat for them, the fans get slapped in the face.

Ubisoft Cuts Off Legit Players With DRM Server Migration; Pirates Play On | Techdirt

 

[Ringel05]

DRMs should be outlawed. While the copywrite is theirs and protected under law, the package they sell me is mine and they (based on old existing laws) should no longer be able to control my access to my property.
They need to find a more consumer friendly method to fight piracy. In this instance they can truthfully: say: "When they take way your games only criminals will have games........."

 

[Quantum Windbag]

DRMs should be outlawed. While the copywrite is theirs and protected under law, the package they sell me is mine and they (based on old existing laws) should no longer be able to control my access to my property.
They need to find a more consumer friendly method to fight piracy. In this instance they can truthfully: say: "When they take way your games only criminals will have games........."

I read a very prominent blogger who bought a game and wanted to test it on various computers to see how different systems affected the performance of the game. He got locked out of the game when he changed the graphics card on his PC. If you can't even buy a new graphics card for a computer would you fork out $50 for a game?

 

[Ringel05]

Before I was aware of the industries, what I call, rental policy under the guise of ownership I legally purchased 3 games at a yard sale and one via Amazon. Because they were previously owned they won't authenticate the games and the process they put in place to "transfer ownership" is intentionally made impossible to comply with. They only recognize a faxed/mailed copy of a new sale receipt, not resale receipts.

 

[Ringel05]

How Bad is PC Piracy Really? Article • Page 1 • Articles • Eurogamer.net

Despite Being Pirated 4.5 Millions Times, 'Witcher 2' Developer Refuses To Annoy Paying Customers With DRM | Techdirt

Maximum PC | Valve's Newell:

 

[iamwhatiseem]

That is a great way of putting it Ringel.."rental under the guise of ownership".
DRM is an abomination on individual rights of ownership.
If you can't sell something - you don't own it.
If you can't access something you purchased without permission from the seller - you don't own it.
As an example, 3-4 years ago I use to subscribe to Rhapsody. I purchased probably 20-30 songs. When I decided to stop paying Rhapsody, I downloaded all of the songs that I purchased. Well...they won't play. If I try to play on WMP it will say "acquiring license..." and then fail. They won't play on iTunes either.
So I had to use "sound converter" a simple app that strips DRM and converts to mp3's. Not everyone knows how to do this so alot of folks just give up.
The funny thing is - those songs are now "illegal" in the eyes of the music industry.

 

[Ringel05]

That is a great way of putting it Ringel.."rental under the guise of ownership".
DRM is an abomination on individual rights of ownership.
If you can't sell something - you don't own it.
If you can't access something you purchased without permission from the seller - you don't own it.
As an example, 3-4 years ago I use to subscribe to Rhapsody. I purchased probably 20-30 songs. When I decided to stop paying Rhapsody, I downloaded all of the songs that I purchased. Well...they won't play. If I try to play on WMP it will say "acquiring license..." and then fail. They won't play on iTunes either.
So I had to use "sound converter" a simple app that strips DRM and converts to mp3's. Not everyone knows how to do this so alot of folks just give up.
The funny thing is - those songs are now "illegal" in the eyes of the music industry.

Basically these companies that use DRM are driving much of the piracy by making the use of their product by legitimate consumers difficult and or annoyingly draconian to access. While I like Ubisofts' games I refuse to buy them because of their focus on their profits only and not their customers. Read the link about Valve, when they decided to move into the Russian market they were told it was futile and all their products would be pirated. The neighsayers were wrong and Russia is now their biggest market even with the large number of piracies that do occur. They're not complaining.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

How Bad is PC Piracy Really? Article • Page 1 • Articles • Eurogamer.net

Despite Being Pirated 4.5 Millions Times, 'Witcher 2' Developer Refuses To Annoy Paying Customers With DRM | Techdirt

Maximum PC | Valve's Newell:

This stuff is amazing. It is worse than I thought. I read through other stories that linked off of your links.
I didn't know it was this bad.
My son and I have been talking about getting away from the lowly X-Box with it's 1990's graphics and hair-pulling annoying wait times for multi-player.
I have been looking at some builds from Cybertron and thinking of getting back to PC gaming and away from the ancient technology of consoles.
Reading this stuff has me thinking twice.

 

[Ringel05]

How Bad is PC Piracy Really? Article • Page 1 • Articles • Eurogamer.net

Despite Being Pirated 4.5 Millions Times, 'Witcher 2' Developer Refuses To Annoy Paying Customers With DRM | Techdirt

Maximum PC | Valve's Newell:

This stuff is amazing. It is worse than I thought. I read through other stories that linked off of your links.
I didn't know it was this bad.
My son and I have been talking about getting away from the lowly X-Box with it's 1990's graphics and hair-pulling annoying wait times for multi-player.
I have been looking at some builds from Cybertron and thinking of getting back to PC gaming and away from the ancient technology of consoles.
Reading this stuff has me thinking twice.

I've been doing some more research and have discovered if you're not into the latest and greatest brand new games that come heavily DRM loaded then just wait a little while.

How to get DRM-free PC games: Just wait | Apple Talk - CNET News

 

[PeteEU]

DRM is as failed as regions were/are on DVDs.

It does not prevent piracy since they crack most DRM pretty quickly, and it does piss people off who legally bought the material and cant use it legally as they wish.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Sort of related.

I feel the same way about buying software or an operating system, but you are restricted to only putting it on one computer. I have four computers at home. Why shouldn't I be able to put it on all my computers.

It's like buying a DVD and being told I can only play it one ONE player, and ONLY that player.

It's just greed by the companies that make the software.

 

[Ringel05]

Sort of related.

I feel the same way about buying software or an operating system, but you are restricted to only putting it on one computer. I have four computers at home. Why shouldn't I be able to put it on all my computers.

It's like buying a DVD and being told I can only play it one ONE player, and ONLY that player.

It's just greed by the companies that make the software.

When I loaded my Win 7 on my 2nd machine in order to authorize it for that machine it gave me a code (series of numbers) and a number to call. The automated process asked me how many computers the load was on then gave me a new authorization code for the new install. I just followed the instructions and typed the new code into my 2nd install and the system was authorized.
I also had been sold (paid very little) a 32 bit Win 7 install disc from a friend which when I installed it a pop up claimed I may have an unauthorized copy and gave me a link to check it. The link said it was unauthorized and wanted me to buy a new version while also placing a "this is an unauthorized copy" message on my desktop.
I reinstalled the operating system, overriding the old install, no pop ups and I get all the updates and patches.
Just because I didn't buy it from Microsoft doesn't mean it's not legally mine.
Now, if you're not a gamer I seriously recommend Linux Mint. You can load it on as many machines as you want and it's free, just download it and burn it as an ISO (bootable disc) on a DVD.

 

[PeteEU]

Sort of related.

I feel the same way about buying software or an operating system, but you are restricted to only putting it on one computer. I have four computers at home. Why shouldn't I be able to put it on all my computers.

It's like buying a DVD and being told I can only play it one ONE player, and ONLY that player.

It's just greed by the companies that make the software.

When I loaded my Win 7 on my 2nd machine in order to authorize it for that machine it gave me a code (series of numbers) and a number to call. The automated process asked me how many computers the load was on then gave me a new authorization code for the new install. I just followed the instructions and typed the new code into my 2nd install and the system was authorized.
I also had been sold (paid very little) a 32 bit Win 7 install disc from a friend which when I installed it a pop up claimed I may have an unauthorized copy and gave me a link to check it. The link said it was unauthorized and wanted me to buy a new version while also placing a "this is an unauthorized copy" message on my desktop.
I reinstalled the operating system, overriding the old install, no pop ups and I get all the updates and patches.
Just because I didn't buy it from Microsoft doesn't mean it's not legally mine.
Now, if you're not a gamer I seriously recommend Linux Mint. You can load it on as many machines as you want and it's free, just download it and burn it as an ISO (bootable disc) on a DVD.

Actually there are reasons for this.

OEM Windows 7 versions live and die with the computer. They are also cheaper. They also only legally can be sold with new PC hardware.

Normal Windows 7 Versions can be installed multiple machines you own. Now you have to go through some hoops sometimes to put it on a new machine but it is nothing major. These versions are also more expensive.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Sort of related.

I feel the same way about buying software or an operating system, but you are restricted to only putting it on one computer. I have four computers at home. Why shouldn't I be able to put it on all my computers.

It's like buying a DVD and being told I can only play it one ONE player, and ONLY that player.

It's just greed by the companies that make the software.

When I loaded my Win 7 on my 2nd machine in order to authorize it for that machine it gave me a code (series of numbers) and a number to call. The automated process asked me how many computers the load was on then gave me a new authorization code for the new install. I just followed the instructions and typed the new code into my 2nd install and the system was authorized.
I also had been sold (paid very little) a 32 bit Win 7 install disc from a friend which when I installed it a pop up claimed I may have an unauthorized copy and gave me a link to check it. The link said it was unauthorized and wanted me to buy a new version while also placing a "this is an unauthorized copy" message on my desktop.
I reinstalled the operating system, overriding the old install, no pop ups and I get all the updates and patches.
Just because I didn't buy it from Microsoft doesn't mean it's not legally mine.
Now, if you're not a gamer I seriously recommend Linux Mint. You can load it on as many machines as you want and it's free, just download it and burn it as an ISO (bootable disc) on a DVD.

Actually there are reasons for this.

OEM Windows 7 versions live and die with the computer. They are also cheaper. They also only legally can be sold with new PC hardware.

Normal Windows 7 Versions can be installed multiple machines you own. Now you have to go through some hoops sometimes to put it on a new machine but it is nothing major. These versions are also more expensive.

Which falls into the category of "rental under the guise of ownership".
If this is the case then when you buy a PC it should clearly state "you do not own the operating system of this computer, only the hardware. You may use the operating system for the life of this computer, at which point your licensed use is terminated".
Wonder how that would affect sales.

 

[PeteEU]

When I loaded my Win 7 on my 2nd machine in order to authorize it for that machine it gave me a code (series of numbers) and a number to call. The automated process asked me how many computers the load was on then gave me a new authorization code for the new install. I just followed the instructions and typed the new code into my 2nd install and the system was authorized.
I also had been sold (paid very little) a 32 bit Win 7 install disc from a friend which when I installed it a pop up claimed I may have an unauthorized copy and gave me a link to check it. The link said it was unauthorized and wanted me to buy a new version while also placing a "this is an unauthorized copy" message on my desktop.
I reinstalled the operating system, overriding the old install, no pop ups and I get all the updates and patches.
Just because I didn't buy it from Microsoft doesn't mean it's not legally mine.
Now, if you're not a gamer I seriously recommend Linux Mint. You can load it on as many machines as you want and it's free, just download it and burn it as an ISO (bootable disc) on a DVD.

Actually there are reasons for this.

OEM Windows 7 versions live and die with the computer. They are also cheaper. They also only legally can be sold with new PC hardware.

Normal Windows 7 Versions can be installed multiple machines you own. Now you have to go through some hoops sometimes to put it on a new machine but it is nothing major. These versions are also more expensive.

Which falls into the category of "rental under the guise of ownership".
If this is the case then when you buy a PC it should clearly state "you do not own the operating system of this computer, only the hardware. You may use the operating system for the life of this computer, at which point your licensed use is terminated".
Wonder how that would affect sales.

Would not effect it at all. That is how it has been pretty much since for pay OS came about.

Remember, OEM Windows is considerably cheaper than non-OEM Windows... you pay for what you get pretty much.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Actually there are reasons for this.

OEM Windows 7 versions live and die with the computer. They are also cheaper. They also only legally can be sold with new PC hardware.

Normal Windows 7 Versions can be installed multiple machines you own. Now you have to go through some hoops sometimes to put it on a new machine but it is nothing major. These versions are also more expensive.

Which falls into the category of "rental under the guise of ownership".
If this is the case then when you buy a PC it should clearly state "you do not own the operating system of this computer, only the hardware. You may use the operating system for the life of this computer, at which point your licensed use is terminated".
Wonder how that would affect sales.

Would not effect it at all. That is how it has been pretty much since for pay OS came about.

Remember, OEM Windows is considerably cheaper than non-OEM Windows... you pay for what you get pretty much.

Oh I wouldn't argue with that.
I don't think there is a product under the sun that people are more ignorant about than computers. What other product is there that can be repackaged and sold to people who already own one that is, for all practical purposes, exactly like what they already have?
How many people run out and buy a shower head that is just like the one they have for no other reason than it is there to buy?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Sort of related.

I feel the same way about buying software or an operating system, but you are restricted to only putting it on one computer. I have four computers at home. Why shouldn't I be able to put it on all my computers.

It's like buying a DVD and being told I can only play it one ONE player, and ONLY that player.

It's just greed by the companies that make the software.

You are buying computers with software installed by the manufacturer, if you buy the OS from Microsoft it is good on any computer you ever own. You can even by a multiple license to install it on more than one computer at a time.

 

[Trajan]

Gaming companies are.

When it comes to DRM, nothing is more annoying and hated than DRM that requires a constant internet connection. This DRM regularly pings a server controlled by the creator of the game in order to prove that you, the paying customer who paid money to buy the game, are not a dirty pirate. One of the loudest critiques of this type of DRM is what happens when the DRM cannot make the connection to the server. We have already seen what happens to Ubisoft games when there is an unexpected server crash. Gamers weren't too thrilled about that. Now we learn that Ubisoft is looking to give its paying customers another look into why such DRM systems are a real bad idea. Ubisoft will be taking its authentication servers down on Tuesday, February 7th for an unspecified amount of time.

While Ubisoft takes its servers down to migrate them, gamers who paid good money in order to play DRM'ed games will be unable to do so. What makes this worse is that all those pirates that this DRM was supposedly going to stop will be able to play those games all they want during the migration. This is the thanks that paying customers get. This is the thanks that fans that want to support Ubisoft in its PC gaming endeavors get for their loyalty. When it comes time for Ubisoft to go to bat for them, the fans get slapped in the face.

Ubisoft Cuts Off Legit Players With DRM Server Migration; Pirates Play On | Techdirt

agreed.

I was a huge counter strike player from CS 1.0 in 2000 on......it was fun, it was a community, I was in a clan, we were very very good and it lasted up until oh, 2005, then Steam came along........Steam is a Valve centric and it ( Valve created CS) swallowed or forced out public servers.

Steam rolled out around late 2003....it was not what the CS community wanted, at all. BUT, valve did...they wanted their co. to control and be the one and only portal via proprietary FTP's for online play. They wanted to drag CSers and others interested in playing into other online Valve (like day of defeat etc.) games so they could charge more and get people to cross platform into X Box ( which any hard core gamer will tell you blows as they design games to be ‘ported’ a PC-Xbox hybrid that sux the playability and detail out of the game etc.) , basically diluting their CS product tying in other games they put on steam.

By 2007 the pioneers and what I and many consider real CSers had bowed out, clans folded or amalgamated........it was never ever the same.

 

[Trajan]

DRMs should be outlawed. While the copywrite is theirs and protected under law, the package they sell me is mine and they (based on old existing laws) should no longer be able to control my access to my property.
They need to find a more consumer friendly method to fight piracy. In this instance they can truthfully: say: "When they take way your games only criminals will have games........."

I read a very prominent blogger who bought a game and wanted to test it on various computers to see how different systems affected the performance of the game. He got locked out of the game when he changed the graphics card on his PC. If you can't even buy a new graphics card for a computer would you fork out $50 for a game?

yup, see my post.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Gaming companies are.

When it comes to DRM, nothing is more annoying and hated than DRM that requires a constant internet connection. This DRM regularly pings a server controlled by the creator of the game in order to prove that you, the paying customer who paid money to buy the game, are not a dirty pirate. One of the loudest critiques of this type of DRM is what happens when the DRM cannot make the connection to the server. We have already seen what happens to Ubisoft games when there is an unexpected server crash. Gamers weren't too thrilled about that. Now we learn that Ubisoft is looking to give its paying customers another look into why such DRM systems are a real bad idea. Ubisoft will be taking its authentication servers down on Tuesday, February 7th for an unspecified amount of time.

While Ubisoft takes its servers down to migrate them, gamers who paid good money in order to play DRM'ed games will be unable to do so. What makes this worse is that all those pirates that this DRM was supposedly going to stop will be able to play those games all they want during the migration. This is the thanks that paying customers get. This is the thanks that fans that want to support Ubisoft in its PC gaming endeavors get for their loyalty. When it comes time for Ubisoft to go to bat for them, the fans get slapped in the face.

Ubisoft Cuts Off Legit Players With DRM Server Migration; Pirates Play On | Techdirt

agreed.

I was a huge counter strike player from CS 1.0 in 2000 on......it was fun, it was a community, I was in a clan, we were very very good and it lasted up until oh, 2005, then Steam came along........Steam is a Valve centric and it ( Valve created CS) swallowed or forced out public servers.

Steam rolled out around late 2003....it was not what the CS community wanted, at all. BUT, valve did...they wanted their co. to control and be the one and only portal via proprietary FTP's for online play. They wanted to drag CSers and others interested in playing into other online Valve (like day of defeat etc.) games so they could charge more and get people to cross platform into X Box ( which any hard core gamer will tell you blows as they design games to be ‘ported’ a PC-Xbox hybrid that sux the playability and detail out of the game etc.) , basically diluting their CS product tying in other games they put on steam.

By 2007 the pioneers and what I and many consider real CSers had bowed out, clans folded or amalgamated........it was never ever the same.

Just like Microsoft and Halo.
Halo CE on the PC was one of the best games ever.
All kinds of user created guns and maps. You could create your own server with whatever guns you wanted, armor strength...you could pilot jets...stealth bombers..even some pretty amazing user created vehicles. BEST OF ALL....you could kick off annoying players and noob tubers...ANNND...instantly join in and out of live games - no waiting!!!!
All gone.
Micosoft tookover and made the HALO II "Vista Only" - even though XP had 70% of the total marketshare - M$ took the best game in a decade and used it to try and sell their OS...and if that wasn't bad enough the rest of the HALO franchise was made XBox only so they could sell their new console.