Slashdot Mirror
Game Publishers Doing More Damage than Pirates?
thenextpresident writes "Over on JoeUser.com, there is an interesting article, from the creator of the previously mentioned TotalGaming.net subscription service, that discusses two things: the PC game market vs the console market, and how one game developer views game publishers as a bigger problem than the software "pirates". "So don't talk to me about piracy. It's not the pirates that have ripped us off of hundreds of thousands in lost royalties. It's been "Real businesses" doing that thank you very much. The position of royalty eating parasite has already been taken." He also digs into all the problems PC games have: usually being buggy on release, CD keys, patches (and more patches), hard drive space while still requiring the CD be in the drive. All together, a really interesting look at the game industry from just one developer."
Copy protection hurts legitimate users more than it helps the software developers. When users who legitimately buy games have trouble playing them, while pirates can simply crack the game (and they can, pretty much no matter what you do) and play it more easily than the legitimate buyers, you know you need to step back and re-evaluate your copy protection policy. Most legit users end up cracking the game anyway, just for simplicity's sake. At least UT2K4's patch removed the CD checking.
It doesn't even stop at games. I can't play Let It Be...Naked by The Beatles in any CD player I own because of the copy protection. There's even a disclaimer on the back stating that it may not work in all CD equipment. However, I'm sure you could download the entire album in 10 minutes if you wanted to.
Looks like the developers are involved in the DP of all time - boned by the publishers and the players. Almost makes me wonder why they bother.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
When I lost my CD to Armed and Dangerous awhile back it really got me looking for a legitamate place where people who bought software and wish to not have to lug out a CD each time they want to play a different game could go. Are there any other place besides gamecopyworld that are like that? I do not want to download any EXE from some random P2P user.
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
In 15 years, I have never NOT bought a game because it had a copy protection. In 15 years, I returned 1 game because of a copy protection issue, but in the same 15 years, I also returned about 10 games for being buggy and unplayable.
Games released in bad condition, my last experience - Temple of Elemental Evil are hurting the industry FAR more than any copy protection issue, as much as the casual pirate would like it to be otherwise. Yes, the article has a point, publishers DO hurt game sales, but mainly because of their crappy stance toward QA.
They should just shut down all the publishers and let the pirates pirate each-other. They can fund new games with the pr0n-ad revenue they get from their sites.
That's not a soda... it's a caffeine delivery device!
Sadly, this guy has a point. Something's not right when a game you just downloaded off Kazaa is less of a hassle to play than the same game off the box. The "copy protection" craze has gone to far; no matter what, digital content of any kind *will* be copied and used illegally. You just can't get arround it, CD-Key, DMCA, Dongles, or whatever. Instead of fighting an uphill battle, software publishers should focus on making the game good enough so people will happily buy it. As this guy said, this is rarely the case nowadays.
As for the patching issues, i didn't mind when patches were minor or to improve the overall experience, but most PC games are so buggy and slow lately that patching is mandatory. Again, if the product needs work, move the deadlines forward a bit and focus on delivering a quality product.
Whenever I've seen those figures of "The game industry lost x kajillion dollars last year to evil pirates," I wind up asking myself "How does that figure stack up to money spent on failed advertising, ineffective copy protection, or some useless novelty packaging feature? How about bloated development costs due to a rushed schedule?"
But then again, I'm not buying the bulk of these games, so I must be an evil pirate.
All that said, the article doesn't really address much. Mostly it's little "fight the power" and "I'm for the little guy" throwaway remarks interspersed with plugs for products. Shame about Strategy First not paying royalties. I wanted to like them.
Happiness is relative, Based upon the way we live.
"Ubi Soft's outstanding QA department"?
hehe tried Rainbow Six 3: Raven Shield?
Published by Ubi 2 years ago and still releasing patches for basic flaws, such as debug commands left that affect multiplayer gaming.
I really liked the game, it's the most retro game I've seen as far as copy protection (was released last year, with a decent ammount of critical acclaim). I could burn the CD without problems and the game didn't even require the CD in the drive to play it. That said, it did have a CD key, which I don't mind so much. And although the game was stable on release, they added NEW features accessable if you had a unique CD key.
If we'd like to change things, perhaps it's time you voted with your wallet. That, and if you'd like to play a really good Turn-based strategy game.
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
I think that is one of the greatest articles that I have read in a very long time. Finally, somebody with common sense pointing out where an industry is really failing as opposed to pointing fingers at piracy. If only there was somebody high up in the music industry and the movie industry that had the same mentality of this developer. Of course, that would also mean that somebody high up in those industries would have a brain...
This guy has it 100% right. Every single game that I've downloaded a no-cd patch for has been a game that I've legally purchased.
Causation can cause correlation
Why shouldn't the companies stop putting copy protection on games? I don't see these "legitimate users" threatening to boycott games with Safedisc on it. How many here have sent written letters through snail mail to their publishers saying they won't buy any more games with Safedisc on it?
Including copy protection on a game, thus far, doesn't cost a publisher any sales. Who looks at a game and doesn't buy it based on its copy protection? So it doesn't work with users' CD-ROMs? Release a post-mortem patch, and people will start playing the game and stop whining.
At this point, regardless of what Stardock's big cheese says or doesn't say, it costs companies more to exclude copy protection than it does to include it. Until consumers stop buying games with copy protection and there is a visible drop in sales that can be unquestionably attributed to the inclusion of copy protection (a visible boycott), it will always exist.
Why do you think that copy protection on music CDs isn't on every single CD? Because enough people return the CD to the store. The only CDs with copy protection are corporate experiments. They're the ones the publishers are using to test the waters. But computer game buyers have been so pavlov-ed into the idea of patching and the inability to return a game that it doesn't even occur to us that we deserve a product that works on first try.
We do, and maybe we should start acting like it.
This is exactly how i feel. If someone is willing to download a game, he *will* download it. Why even count it as a 'potential sale'? In a way, it's a price of doing buisness for the game industry, because the moment a CP scheme annoys a legal customer, is over the line, and the truth is it won't really solve much of the problem. Having to occupy the CD player with a game disc after installing 5gb is insane.
In fact, would it hurt sales a lot if the game was released without CP? If the same game came in two flavors, which one would you buy? Would it matter, since you have actually paid for it, as you intended in the first place?
I have downloaded games, for the sole intention to try them before buying. I agree with you, i'd love if most demos where available before the game release, just like the UT2k4 one.
Blame it on the console games. Ever since publishers thought the XBox and PS2 were going to kill PC gaming, there has been a shift in paradigm. I'm seeing shallower and shallower games designed to appeal to the average couch potato retard.
It is not only the copy protection that publishers are screwing up on. I hate copy protection as much as the next guy. I will not buy The Sims. I will not buy Battlefield Vietnam. I will not buy Soldner. I will not buy Freelancer.
But I will buy Doom 3; at least it has some creative direction and provides an immersive experience. I will buy Half-Life 2; at least it give syou a bigger possibility space (in the AI and physics) than other games. However, I will NOT buy, and will NOT even waste the time to download, titles that have been rushed out the door simply to make money. This problem exacerbates warez activity.
Is it the publisher getting whacked by its inability to meet the lowest common denominator (which is damned low these days) or is it laziness and incompetence on part of the developers? This is another reason people don't buy games sometimes and just download them. Freshness and originality are out and repetitive gameplay is in. Graphics, mindless multiplayer, and other console trappings are replacing personality, feel, and depth of gameplay. Do we want to ante up the cash for yet another Battlefield 1942 or Far Cry (which wins my award for repetitive unoriginality) clone? We don't; that's why we download games.
Does someone see a vicious cycle here? Developers and publishers work in tandem to develop games that aren't meant to be played but meant to make money. Jaded gamers routinely respond by doing the ole download-off-IRC and Throw-Away. The publishers feed back by introducing more copy protection, which fosters resentment in the community, which decreases the number of enthusiastic developers, which...
ror yhl
1. Putting a label on the front of the CD with they key number.
2. Adding the key to a word document I use to store all important numbers.
Copy-protection methods are necessary. It's not the publisher's fault that copy protection is necessary, it's the fault of the software pirates. Placing the blame on the publisher for something that was caused by piracy is pretty poor planning.
The guy should have just said that we need less-intrusive copy protection schemes. Like those little scanners at the exit of every retail store in the United States. Ink tags and things *are* a hassle to consumers, but no one minds because theft drives prices up so much and the hassle is minimal.
This guy's view is shortsighted, but if he wants to self-publish his own games he's welcome to it. That's the proper solution, if publishers are *really* the problem.
This is a non-argument Pirates steal regardless, the internet has made piracy 100% easier then it used to be and getting no-CD cracks is so easy the target market of gamers (teens to adults of 35 or so) are computer savvy enough to do it. Not many in the target market of gamers are computer ignorant or illiterate anymore we've had an entire generation that has grown up using the internet and computers, etc, so it is second nature.
We've long since passed the age of needing copy protection like SecuRom because of 'casual copying' because of the mass introduction of CD and DVD burners, if you want to blame someone blame the hardware industry and the game developers themselves for not working with the hardware industry to create DVD/CD roms that can read special (non-standard) media that is NOT SOLD TO THE PUBLIC (see: Game cube discs). Make the non standard media bigger by a factor of 25-50% more storage and sell the public media that has 'less' then the special IP discs so they can't fit the content on publicly available discs.
The people who made CD burners and DVD burners ubiqitous but yet did not design their hardware to allow software developers do use non-standard media (ala like the gamecube disc) to protect their IP, it is the fault of the game industry sitting on its ass and letting the hardware industry ruin them through innovation. The hardware industry KNOWS that people want its hardware to get free stuff they are not stupid, they make insane profits at the expensive of IP owners, be it game developers, movie makers, music, etc.
If you want to protect your IP you're going to have to stop putting it on media that the public can get it's hands on. Thats much better then any kind of current copy protection. And yes I know there would still be "rips"/images but without insanely draconian DRM (which no one wants) it's something the software and game industry has been putting up with for a long time.
People will always steal and bootleg, no matter how rich or how poor you are people want all they can experience before they die and 'to hell' with everyone else.
Either way it's pretty much too late now, until the introduction of DRM and higher standards and stopping the crappy games from game developers themselves. PC gaming will be nothing but the big names (doom3, half-life, etc).
the only reason developers deal with publishers at all is shelf-space, plain and simple. If you write a game and want it on display at Sam Goody, Electronics Botique, or Wal-Mart - you have to do it over their dead body.
Game publishing companies are aiming to be the digital equivilant to the RIAA, in many respects. With developers as the under-paid artists.
If the biggest dev studios (and small ones too) resorted to using their own means of publishing - such as "Steam", eBay, and Online ordering - then magic might happen.
Less hype, few patches, longer development cycles, and better games. Developers will get what they deserve, and piracy will be negligible again.
Copy protection begins and ends with cd-keys as multiplayer licenses. So don't waste your time/money on safedisc/laserlok/whatever. Piracy is forever, and you won't be it's champion unless you're running an MMOG, and maybe not even then.
Publishers such as Garagegames have the right idea IMO. Fight the power!
Why can't all fpga/microcontroller manufacturers just release free optimizing compilers???
You know, this could be perceptual only, but I don't think so- anyone remember way back in the old days of pc Gaming, Round about, oh Alakalbeth/Ultima 1/Ultima 2 days, when things had basically zero copy protection- and then suddenly, as there was more and more money to be made, there came the fast march of copy-protected crap onto the shelves, and prices started to soar. Soon enough, you had games that were permanently broken from the copy protection (Deathlord, anyone?) that wouldn't work at all out of the box (Though the cracked version worked like a charm, natch), and sales fell off, and evceryone screamed about the death of the pc games market, and those damn pirates...
And things stagnated for a while, until some really brilliant ideas came to the fore, epitiomsed by the Shareware movement and it's idea of "Hey, maybe what players want is good games, that are fun to play, and actually work"- And so everyone jumped on the bandwagon again, but this time, they had learned that lesson- "Oh, no, no lame copy-protections schemes and crap for us- we'll just make good games, and win that way"...
Until of course, inevitably, things ran out of steam, and here we are hearing the same things I remember from, like, 1980: "It's those damn pirates!" And "copy-protection will save the industry!"
How ironic. In less than thirty years, we seem to have completely cycled around to the same exact point, and no one's noticing at all.
Bah.
To hell with copy protection- any fool could tell you that it will be pirated any way you do it, anyhow. The number will always be about the same statistically, too, so give it up already- copy protection is like the old saw about teaching a pig to sing- it will never work, and it only annoys the pig.
To hell with lost revenue due to Pirates- The revenue is being lost because you're making overpriced crap- make good stuff for a fair price, and people will buy it- and not just the latest clone of the latest clone of some far-off distantly remembered original idea- come up with one good thing instead of seventy piles of steaming feces.
And most of all, pay a little attention to where you've been, so you can recogonise when you start to run in circles.
...if you want to blame someone blame the hardware industry and the game developers themselves for not working with the hardware industry to create DVD/CD roms that can read special (non-standard) media that is NOT SOLD TO THE PUBLIC (see: Game cube discs)
This has already been tried. The Dreamcast used a proprietary "GD-ROM" format, in an attempt to staunch piracy. I have a spindle of backed-up Dreamcast games. The GameCube has a proprietary mini-DVD disc that spins backwards and is not available to the public. GameCube pirates can stream disc images over a network to a software-modified GameCube, and play them that way without ever having to touch a mini-DVD.
In my opinion, game copy protection is pointless. It has never stopped me from downloading a game I've wanted to play, but it has stopped me from playing games I've already purchased. I use a virtual CD application with backed up images of the few games I play, to avoid having to keep the original CDs nearby, having to swap discs when I want to play a different game, and to essentially cache the entire game on the hard disk to speed up loading times. I had a hell of a time making a disc image of Neverwinter Nights: Hordes of the Underdark to use in this system. Since I knew I'd never be able to return the game, I soldiered on and figured out how to make it work, but if I thought for a minute that I would have been able to get a refund for a defective product, I would have returned the game to the store the same day I bought it.
And that is the reason that ineffectual copy protection isn't laughed out of publishing companies' board rooms each and every time it's suggested. As another poster mentioned, people will attempt to return crippled music CDs (and often succeed). However, I can't remember the last time I heard of somebody being able to successfully return a console or PC game, at least without involving upper management. This sort of policy keeps gamers from speaking with their wallets in the same way that music CD customers can, and denies game companies the feedback they need about the copy protection technologies they employ.
I firmly believe that if game publishers and retailers allowed people to return games, that the amount of casual pirating would be greatly reduced. Of course, so would sales of poor games that mysteriously got great reviews, so there goes that idea. =P
Yes but pirating for the DC and GC is much less common (at least in North america) when you make the method of piracy difficult an inaccesable to the 'masses' then pirating for PS2 and xbox because they share media with PC DVD/CD-R burners. I have not been easily able "mod" a gc, then burn discs to pirate my gamecube games where you can do that with PS2 and Xbox games. Case in point: I have to buy all my GC games and its kept me from looking for alternatives, I wait a year or so and buy older good games for 29-35 or less. With the PS2 and Xbox I can just mod and burn. With DVD burners at all time lows and with games costing upwards of 50$ a shot, 1 DVD burner + mod chip equals the cost of maybe 2-3 games and enables you to rent and burn every game. Where as with the GC they do not have easily accessable "GC burners". Emulation of modern consoles usually takes until after the end of the life of the console before it effects sales and then it doesn't matter anyway.
My point was - the hardware and software developers have to start taking IP seriously if they dont want to end up worse then the music industry, software is much more expensive then music and Video games are still a little 'niche' with GC having somethng like 13 million installed base, xboxx having 13 million and PS2 having ~30-40 million worlwide. Compare that NES and SNES sold over 45million units each.