Slashdot Mirror
LGP To Introduce Game Copy Protection
libredr writes "Phoronix reports that Linux Game Publishing have developed an Internet-based copy protection which will be used in their upcoming commercial game port, such as Sacred: Gold. Any user will be able to install the game, but to launch it he will need to provide a valid key and a password, which are validated against LGP's servers. The key/password combination will allow a user to install the software on different computers. However, an Internet connection will be required even for a single-player game, which might be a hassle for some users. This scheme has enraged some of the beta testers and LGP CEO, Michael Simms, responded he regrets he has to introduce a copy protection scheme, but has to do this since a lot more people download their titles instead of buying them, to the point they even received support requests for pirated version. But will every pirated copy magically transforms into a sale, or will this scheme just annoy legitimate users and be cracked anyway? One really wonders."
The CEO did say that, should anything happen to LGP, he and all of his dev team are authorized to distribute patches which remove the check.
Colin Dean Go a year without DRM
Assuming you need to validate online EVERY time you play- this eliminates playing : in an airplane, on a road trip, when the internet's down, in class (some class rooms have wifi blocked), and at my parents house when visiting for the weekend.
I have a better idea, if I must have this game, I'll just crack it. But then why go through all that trouble to "fix" a game I purchased and put the security of my system at risk by running an unknown program?? Might as well steal the whole thing.
Belief? Hope? Preference?The Existential Vortex
The beta mailing list for Sacred had some discussion on the new key feature but I'd hardly call it an "enraged" exchanged. No chair throwing was observed. Any protection system is a thorny issue.
Pretty much every commercial game I've bought for Linux has some sort of activation system, key lookup or similar. Most of them have some system for authenticating once online and then going offline thereafter. DropTeam even offered a way to generate an authorization on one machine and use it on a non-networked machine.
Storm in a teacup.
Cheers,
Toby Haynes
Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
Really, anyone who "Downloaded" the beta will have an internet connection. You can disconnect if you still use dialup or satellite after it validates you. So a few kb of data. It lets you install to as many computers as you want too.
Look at how many people use steam. It does a lot more than validate an account and people love it. It is also better than an activation based system where you get X installs and that is it. Again, this lets you play it anywhere.
---- aut viam inveniam aut faciam
So, reducing market exposure via pirated copies is somehow magically going to translate into higher sales?
Honestly, who buys a game as a last resort when they can't find a pirated copy of it? Conversely, software piracy has introduced many people to games and game series that have directly led to sales.
It's amazing that some people still think casual piracy is detrimental to the video game market.
Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
Copy protection that inconveniences the honest user will:
[ ] make some of your honest (and now inconvenienced) users walk away
[ ] make pirates come to you so they can pay and have a less comfortable (but legal) copy
Hint: Only one answer is correct.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
I think it's more of an issue that support costs a company money. This is normally fine, as it is factored into the cost of the game. If you pirate a game you really have no right to expect a paid employee to assist you in getting the game to run. You're on your own.
This sounds more like a statement of principle than anything else, but maybe I'm wrong.
No, I am not an English major. My posts are subject to typos and incorrect grammar. Do not expect perfection.
some "piracy" (unsanctioned demos) will be converted to sales, and some legitimate users would be annoyed by the scheme.
If there is a legitimate demo I might try it, and then if I like it I will buy it. If there is no demo I won't download an unsanctioned game; I will wait until there is a review from one or three sites I trust, and or good word of mouth about it, and only then will I consider buying it.
DRM/copy prevention/anti"piracy" schemes WILL annoy me, and no amount of awesome will get me to buy such a game. It's good to hear about these things before I consider a game.
Of course, I run a mac and an ubuntu rig, so I'm not in the target market for many game companies anyway.
More music, fewer hits
Honestly, when has this ever -- EVER -- been the case?
Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
That seems like a stupid idea. It's very unlikely I'd steal a game, find it broken, and then go out and buy it after that.
I understand, I shouldn't steal in the first place- but I'd just assume it was horribly coded and that brings my likelyhood of purchase even lower.
*Disclaimer: I personally purchase all games I play- However, I do steal no-cd cracks so I don't have to bother, and I also steal serials some times to play a lan game of command and conquer.. I'm not purchasing two copies to play a few games against a friend in my own house. I'd say the only game that got that right was Sins of a Solar Empire (which I didn't even like), but there was no copy protection, and they even allowed multiple installs. It is a multiplayer game by design, and they accepted that. I didn't like the game too much, but am still happy I gave them my money.
Belief? Hope? Preference?The Existential Vortex
This is just going to annoy potential users, and reduce sales of the game.
Eventually it will cause less games to be ported to Linux/BSD/etc as the companies will assume that Linux users aren't interested in games (instead of realizing Linux users aren't interested in games that phone home and have irritating copy protection).
Those that do get a copy the game - one way or another - will probably crack the program (or redirect validation requests to a daemon which always returns a positive verification).
But will every pirated copy magically transforms into a sale, or will this scheme just annoy legitimate users and be cracked anyway? One really wonders.
A thief walks into a fine winery and takes a bottle without paying for it. Just walks out the door. Two days later, the thief comes back and asks what food might go well with the wine he stole. The store, shocked and appalled at how brazen thieves are becoming, puts locks on the cabinets and asks that people contact an employee, who is nearby and ready to help at any time, to get wine out of the case.
The author of this summary would respond that the store is so inconveniencing its patrons that it ought to be closed down. That response has nothing to do with software freedom or idealism or the right way to do things or being sensitive when legitimately protecting one's assets. This is utter detachment from reality itself.
The OSS crowd steals from its own. This story and the few comments already ("If they put copy protection on it that annoys me in any way I'll just steal/crack it") makes that very clear. I'm siding with the authors on this one. Linux advocates always seem to complain when games won't work with Linux. Then, if this story is any indication, when they do work with Linux, the same people who complain that games for profit never work properly run out and immediately steal the game. Do you really expect people to develop multimillion dollar games for Linux if that's how things work?
Put your copy protection on the game, man.
ACs are modded -6. I don't read you, I don't mod you, I don't see you. Don't like it? Don't be a coward.
Everybody always whines about the lack of linux games. We all know how much effort it takes to write a game, especially a good one. Now here is a company offering something that looks fairly decent, and includes a very minimal and polite way to ensure you actually payed for it. First thing everybody says, no I will not buy it, since it requires me to prove that I bought it ?? WTF ?? Are we really surprised there are not many commercial quality games out there ?
If you want linux games, you either make your own/help people make them, or you pay for them. It is that simple. Im buying this one when it is out of beta, just as I preferably buy hardware that has good vendor supplied OS drivers for them. Vote with your valet.
Complexity is a measure of our ignorance...
This isn't specifically a Linux gaming issue. That it should be showing up in the Linux context just shows how serious the dilemma facing the PC gaming industry has become.
Before I go any further; I am a huge fan of PC gaming. I didn't own a console until I was 22. I grew up playing PC games like the Ultima series, the X-Wing and Wing Commander games and, later, the Westwood/Blizzard RTSes. I still buy and play PC games and the games as it's clear that, until developers start making better allowances for mouse and keyboard play, some genres (particularly RTSes) will never work properly on a console.
However, PC gaming is now hurtling towards an abyss. I know people have been saying this for years. But now, for the first time, I believe them.
We have now reached the point where, when a new first or third person shooter comes out on both PC and consoles, I will always buy the console version. Why? While I don't much like console controllers for playing fpses, I can tolerate them. The resolutions on my HDTV can't compare with what my PC can put out, but they are good enough. But, more than that, I know that with a console game, I do not need to worry about falling foul of a copy protection system which either means I can't read the disk (used to happen a lot... I had to go through 3 DVD drives before I found one that could run all of my games), have to remove some of my existing software to play it (can you imagine "Hey, it seems you have Gears of War game-data on your 360's hard-disk! No Halo 3 for you then!"?) or access the net every time I want to play it.
I can't entirely blame the PC gaming industry. Piracy levels are absolutely ridiculous. Of course, anybody with half a brain knows that not every pirated copy of a game means a lost sale. But there's no denying that more than a few people who would have considered a purchase will instead be lured by the siren call of bittorrent. I know a few people who work in the industry and a lot of these developers, outside of a few big superstars, operate on the thinnest of margins. Anything they can do to prop said margin up, they will.
I don't honestly know what the solution is. Between the traditional hardware hassles and the new copy protection woes, buying a PC game is starting to feel like more trouble than it's worth. Over on the consoles, the copy-protection mechanisms are invisible to the average end-user. With Sony deciding to get rid of region protection for games, I'm actually in a position where I have no complaints whatsoever regarding the extent to which my PS3 and PSP are or are not locked down.
Of course, this isn't to say that there aren't problems on the horizon in console-land either. My big emerging gripe there regards firmware updates. All three of the systems out there insist on these on a regular basis if you want to use any online features. The 360 version isn't too painful, but the Wii version is distinctly irritating and the PS3 updates are far too frequent, take far too long to download and fail to download far too often when the servers are busy.
Is this guy retarded? I'm not buying Mass Effect for this *exact reason*.
Meanwhile, Sins of a Solar Empire, a DRM free game, enters it's 6th month on the top 10 selling games list.
There is a war going on for your mind.
If they pirated your game are they really your customers?
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
It is becoming pretty clear from all these DRM articles lately that many Slashdotters are extremely arrogant. I say many because I have to assume that is the case when the majority of the comments that are modded up deal with people saying either: DRM is bad and will cost them more customers than if they left it open or DRM will cause the posting Slashdotter to pirate the game. I say this is arrogant because there is just some sort of assumption that what they are saying is factual without any thing to back it up. You may feel that DRM costs them more customers because you won't by it, but more likely it is the case that they ran the numbers and found that not to be true. Also, it is arrogant to think you are morally ok to pirate the game just because they do something you don't like.
I am fine with the people who buy the game than use a cracked version. But the people who just pirate and justify it are just nuts. I actually don't care if you pirate the game, just don't make up stuff saying that what you are doing is right. If people didn't pirate, there wouldn't be DRM. Yet Slashdot blames the companies for adding DRM and openly admit they will pirate the game. This just further justifies their actions. I just don't understand why some of you are so irrational about this. It is like a religious debate where facts and logic have no room to exist.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
Does it matter? Does the fact that pirates don't intend to buy the game somehow give them the right to procure it for free?
No banks--that I'm aware of--charge for the transaction if you choose to have it processed "as credit"; i.e., swipe the card and sign the receipt. In the case of most small retailers, all debit transactions are processed "as credit" because the banks/processing companies charge a higher percentage for direct debit as well as charging a higher fee for the PIN pad needed to input a PIN.
No, it won't, but it might get them more sales by slowing down the pirates.
What? No one ever bought a game because they couldn't pirate it.
But plenty of people have not bought a game because it difficult to pirate it.
Personally, I don't pirate because I'm well to do and have plenty of money to spend on games. That and the games I prefer are usually small developers and I personally feel that they should continue making games so I buy them.
However, I have not bought games simply because of the copy protection they have used. I just don't have the time or effort to crack my own games for the same reason I won't pirate them, so if I hear that a game (Codemasters I am looking at you) has StarForce, SecuRom, or the like... I won't even consider purchasing or pirating it.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
Given that it is an online key activation scheme, your post is equivalent to asking, "how will encryption ever work on an open system like Linux".
That piracy on linux is so rife that this is neccesary? If it really is the case that linux users are pirating games for the platform then shame on you. If we want linux to be taken more seriously as a gaming platform then you have to be prepared to put your wallet where your mouth is and support those companies that are putting the effort in.
N.
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
Let me make sure I understand this correctly. You will not pay for a game that has DRM. That is, you will vote with your wallet and refuse to give money to companies which protect their games with DRM copy protection. Excellent use of free-market economics.
But, you reserve the right to download it, find a crack, and play the game without having paid for it. This is like saying you refuse to buy things from Walmart because they put small stores out of business, but then turning around and stealing things from Walmart because "I can't find this in the smaller stores."
Is DRM a Bad Thing? Undoubtably. It prevents people who have purchased a product from using it while providing a temporary hindrance to people who intended to steal it all along. Vote with your wallet. It's a business strategy and, if it lacks support in the market, it will fail. Be proactive about it. Write the company and say "As interesting as this game is, I will not support a company which prevents paying customers from using what they are paying for. Therefore, I will not play it."
But, when you then decide, "You know, I am really interested in that game." If you download it and crack it, you have broken the law. And, you have sent the company the wrong message. Because you have told them, "I refuse to pay for something I can steal for free." Their only logical response is to make it more expensive to steal. Because they are beholden to their stockholders to produce a profit, which makes giving the game away for free problematic.
http://www.linuxgamepublishing.com/press_releases/200806241.txt
How our copy protection works
Our copy protection is an online protection system. There is never a need to have a disc in the drive, or to have the hard copy of the game with you.
When you install, the system will ask you for the key that came with the game, and then for a password, and, optionally, your email address.
Once the key has been verified on the LGP servers, and the password registered then you are good to go, you never need to worry about the system again. It will call to the LGP servers each time the game starts, to verify its details. It does all this in the background. You do not need to enter anything when you start the game.
If you wish to install the game on multiple personal machines, you may do so, using the same password and CD key. This is explicitly allowed.
If you ever lose your password, you can request to have it emailed to you using the key management system, which is readily available. This is why we ask for your email address during registration, your email address will never be used for anything else.
If your machine is not directly connected to the internet, or for some reason your internet connection does not allow direct connection to our servers, the game will allow you to continue to play for a certain amount of time before requesting you re-verify with the LGP key server. If your machine is unable to do this, for instance it does not have an internet connection, or it is firewalled in such a way as to block the connection, or perhaps you are on holiday and are nowhere near an ethernet socket for your laptop, then you may verify your game using a web browser or WAP phone browser. This can be used to indefinitely extend the time that a game may be played on a machine with no direct internet connection, as long as you have SOME internet access.
Whether or not I'd like ads in my game depends on how the ads are executed. There are good and bad ways to put products into a game. Some examples:
Coca Cola is inserted into a Deus Ex-workalike.
Good: Soda cans are now Coke cans; there are a few Coke vending machines throughout the game.
Bad: Characters talk about how much they'd like a refreshing can of Coke Zero - full taste and zero sugar, yum.
Subway advertises in a multiplayer FPS.
Good: Billboards around the map show the "eat fresh" slogan; a downtown map contains a Subway.
Bad: Subway baners in every loading screen; every urban map contains a Subway; the Subway Muppet is seen anywhere near the game.
Dunkin' Donuts sponsors the next GTA.
Good: There are several DDs sprinkled throughout Abstract Concept City, acting as cop magnets; one mission can be made easier by distracting a cop with a box of donuts.
Bad: Every single cop in the city and half of the underworld have no other discussion topic but which kind of donut they love most; every problem can be solved by tossing donuts around, Hostess Fruit Cake-style.
In general, if the product placement is done tactfully and unobtrusively I entirely agree with it and am happy to have my games subsidized. If it's blatant and in-your-face I want the corp in question to piss off and take their product with them.
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
However, some people have no shame.
Q: "I cracked this demo to have unlimited playtime and now it crashes when I jump on the foozle!"
A: "Buy the game, then you won't have that problem."
Q: "I downloaded this game from a torrent and one of the files was broken, can you provide it for me?"
A: "No. Buy the game, you won't have this problem."
Q: "I just got this game and it has a huge bug in it at the end of level two! Your company is a terrible game company! I will never buy from you again! I hope your entire family dies in a fire!"
A: "That bug only existed in the private beta-test version and was already fixed in the very first version of the game that was on sale. Buy the game, you won't have this problem."
Q: "This game is hard! Can you spend the next few weeks providing a slow step-by-step walkthrough of exactly how to win the game and answer all of my questions about it?"
A: "... got a receipt?"
Pirates reporting bugs isn't a problem. Pirates taking your hard work for free and then demanding that you do even more work for them personally, for free, deserve a head-booting.
I've gotcher 'Women In Gaming' RIGHT HERE!
I have many legitimately purchased games on my Linux box. I bought games from Loki, back when, specifically to encourage the developers to bring games over.
I will NOT buy any software with a "phone home" requirement. I just deleted LGP's bookmark.
Wow.
How about running the game under emulation? It used to only be a complaint from the WINE and classic gaming crowds, now that MS is shoving Vista down everyone's throats, it's going to be a lot more common. The same for a "key" disk. Nothing pisses me off to no end like a game which won't run without a having the CD in my drive. Nevermind that as a sysadmin, I would much rather have a second battery in my expansion bay rather then the DVD drive.
There's two very good, real world reasons for you.
Does it matter? Does the fact that pirates don't intend to buy the game somehow give them the right to procure it for free?
Yes it matters if their method doesn't turn pirates into legitimate customers, then it has no effect on their bottom line, and does nothing but prevent a freeloader from getting something for free, at a negative cost to the legitimate customers.
Is your desire to deny the pirates their fallacious right to free stuff so important that you will inconvenience your paying customers? At no benefit to sales but at a cost to customer satisfaction? And if your chest was a cannon, would you fire your heart at the pirates, Captain Ahab?
Hyperbole aside, I doubt this will end up having much effect on LGPs sales. Whatever tiny amount of pirates turn into paying customers will be balanced by those who don't want to buy a game with DRM of any kind, ending up more or less a wash. What, then, is the point?
The enemies of Democracy are
A CD isn't required. Score 1 for us. The product can be installed on more than one PC at a time. Now we're 2-0. The CEO said that they'll release a non-DRM fix if the company ever goes under so your purchase has future guarantees. 3-0! So what are ya'll bitching about?
Who generated those statistics, and what advantage do they get from having the numbers come out that way?
I believe that somebody told you that. I will accept the possibility that you actually saw such a report. Before I'd accept that report as truth, I'd need to know a LOT more about it.
OTOH, I wouldn't bother to study enough to convince myself, because I don't care that much. I accept that they have their reasons, whatever they are. They don't change the cost/benefit to me.
I already don't buy games very often, because most of the ones that I've bought haven't been worth the money. I still do occasionally, because some have been QUITE worth the cost. Copy-protection decreases the benefit to me, so I will already be buying fewer. (Games that are copy-protected are intrinsically more brittle, more subject to breaking when the system changes.)
OTOH, I'm not a large buyer of games anyway. Perhaps I'm not typical of their target audience. But this looks to me to be far more likely to discourage my buying additional games than it is to have any other change in my behavior.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.