Slashdot Mirror


Brad Wardell's Plan To Save PC Gaming

A few weeks ago, we discussed Stardock CEO Brad Wardell's "Gamer's Bill of Rights," a proposal for removing some of the PC gaming industry's more obnoxious characteristics, such as annoying DRM and no-return policies. Shacknews sat down with Wardell for a lengthy interview in which he discussed his reasons for starting the project, how it's being received by game companies, and how he wants the gaming community to help. Quoting: "I've already gotten calls from Microsoft, from Take 2, and other publishers who are interested in moving forward on this. Obviously the first step is we have to really define these items. And I've had other developers and publishers who have come back and said, 'No, because it's not flexible enough.' For example, what happens if someone wants to do a policy where there's CD copy protection, but after the first month [consumers] can download a patch that gets rid of it. So obviously that's a perfectly good solution too, but our thing eliminates the ability to do that."

18 of 250 comments (clear)

  1. Great idea, and all.. by PC+and+Sony+Fanboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wasn't aware that PC gaming needed saving.

    At least, not any more than console gaming needed saving...

    1. Re:Great idea, and all.. by DragonTHC · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think you're a bit confused.

      PC gaming is very much alive. Casual gamers number in the tens of millions for PC. Ever play a flash game on the web?

      Even the hardcore gamer who upgrades his rig once a year or more is still very much alive. Hardware manufacturers wouldn't exist if we weren't buying their stuff.

      That being said, I think large publishers like EA and Ubisoft are trying to kill PC gaming. It's not really as big a revenue stream for them as console games.

      It is, however, the place for innovation. Ubisoft wouldn't exist if not for Cliff Blezinski and Tim Sweeney. And, Epic is continuing to innovate, though not as much as some other developers. Their revenue stream has shifted to something way more sustainable, engine licensing.

      You still have plenty of developers continuing to innovate. Steam, ID, Crytek to name a few.

      Though I agree with a few others here, that the large publishers are bad for the vitality of the gaming industry on a whole, it stands to reason that just as shit floats to the top, the industry will continue to consolitdate as long as their is money to be made. And, as long as there is money to be made, publishers will try and take as much of the pot as they can through consolidation and other anti-competitive practices.

      --
      They're using their grammar skills there.
    2. Re:Great idea, and all.. by Danse · · Score: 5, Informative

      That being said, I think large publishers like EA and Ubisoft are trying to kill PC gaming. It's not really as big a revenue stream for them as console games.

      Don't forget about Microsoft! Games for Windows is a cruel joke. It seems to be primarily about them padding profits by giving the PC sloppy seconds on games that get shoveled out for the 360. They tend to look like ass and play even worse because nobody bothers to make the games actually play like PC games and take advantage of the strengths of the platform. Seems like Microsoft is more determined than anyone to kill PC gaming.

      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
    3. Re:Great idea, and all.. by varcher · · Score: 5, Informative

      I remember something about Halo originally being designed for the PC then msft bought it and had it ported to console,...

      Don't let any rabid Apple Fan hear you. Halo was originally a full OpenGL Mac game. Fans still remember the Jobs keynote "Great games are coming back to the Mac", with Jason Jones showing a cinematic with "all this is rendered real time, in OpenGL"... Bungee was a Mac-only outfit, until Microsoft, sniffing out a potential flagship game for its new XBOX system, bought them out in 2000, sank the whole Mac/OpenGL part, and... the rest is history.

    4. Re:Great idea, and all.. by Ostracus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Don't forget about Microsoft! Games for Windows is a cruel joke. It seems to be primarily about them padding profits by giving the PC sloppy seconds on games that get shoveled out for the 360."

      *Looks at the Sins of Solar Empire box he just purchased*

      Wow! Danse's right. Just look at the sloppy seconds, games for Windows tagged box I just got. Whatever will I do?

      --
      Shai Schticks:"You don't make peace with friends, you make peace with enemies"
    5. Re:Great idea, and all.. by eht · · Score: 3, Informative

      Bungie hadn't been Mac only for years, check out later versions of Marathon, and Myth was released Windows and Mac simultaneously.

  2. When will they learn? by DragonTHC · · Score: 5, Insightful

    what happens if someone wants to do a policy where there's CD copy protection, but after the first month [consumers] can download a patch that gets rid of it. So obviously that's a perfectly good solution too, but our thing eliminates the ability to do that."

    That CD copy protection doesn't even work. The game gets pirated before it's released!

    These companies are just fucking stupid. SOMEONE IN YOUR SUPPLY CHAIN IS STEALING FROM YOU! Why punish us?

    Where do games go after they get mastered? Keep a closer eye on that.

    --
    They're using their grammar skills there.
  3. My suggestion by FoolsGold · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ideally? Get rid of DRM. It NEVER benefits the consumer, and the pirate copies have it removed anyway.

    If you HAVE to use DRM because the old farts who run these companies insist on it, have the game hosted on something like Steam or GameTap.

    If you do decide to go the Steam route, don't incorporate further DRM on top of the Steam version of the game (I'm looking at you, BioShock).

    1. Re:My suggestion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What happens when Steam or GameTap go out of business?

    2. Re:My suggestion by Atriqus · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, Valve has already announced their contingency plan: if they're on the way out, they'll release a final patch to steam that disables the phoning home.

      --
      Hey, look! It's Bono's brother.
    3. Re:My suggestion by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, Valve has already announced their contingency plan: if they're on the way out, they'll release a final patch to steam that disables the phoning home.

      Yeah, and companies that are going out of business are always able to see it ahead of time, wrap things up neatly and wind the business down gracefully. They're always able to implement their "going out of business scenario."

      It never happens that things just spiral out of control and one day they find that their creditors have locked the doors.

      --
      This space available.
    4. Re:My suggestion by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd feel a lot better if that patch existed, somewhere in escrow, in case that happened.

      But honestly, it's a compromise I can live with. Steam doesn't force me to keep track of a CD, doesn't fuck up my computer, and does let me re-download the game as often as I like, on as many computers as I like.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    5. Re:My suggestion by 0123456 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Lets face it, the reason the companies are employing DRM is because (most, not all) gamers fucked them over and forced their hand by just greedily pirating everything we could get out hands on."

      When I was a kid in the 80s, pretty much everyone in my school who owned a computer pirated games, and all the fancy DRM scams they used were broken by ten-year-olds in their bedrooms; after trying more and more intrusive DRM scams, eventually the distributors gave up because it simply did not work, and games were released for years with no DRM at all.

      DRM is 'sowed' by retarded control-freak publishers who have no clue about technology and don't care how much they screw their customers; piracy has little to do with it. Which is fortunate, because the ten-year-olds are still cracking DRM scams almost as soon as they're released.

  4. Lets see... by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Develop

    A) Cross-platform games
    B) Get rid of the insane DRM, if you want a CD serial key thats fine as they are easily cracked later in its lifetime, but don't activate it online (with the exception of say, a MMORPG)
    C) Develop for a generation before, don't develop a game for quad-core CPUs and dual video cards, develop for a generation before the current generation. Optimize for multiple CPUs and video cards all you want, but I won't upgrade my graphics card/RAM just to play a game.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    1. Re:Lets see... by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Saying Starcraft is a counter example is silly. People *still* play it in droves,

      Yes. People also play Doom, Pong, and Solitaire, in droves. What's your point?

      and it still looks good.

      Respectfully, no it doesn't. It looks no better than it did at the time.

      the game may not get better looking with newer hardware, but if it looks good to start with, who cares?

      Well, you're right -- it looks exactly as good as it did to start with.

      I cite it as a counterexample, because you know what? No game can look worse now than when it started. But because Starcraft looks exactly the same, it also means that other games look better.

      As for cross platform, Linux is still going to be last on the list for reasonable reasons.

      Fair enough -- yet for most games which would bother to make a Mac port, I don't see Linux as a major hurdle. They already had to make it OpenGL to make it play well on the Mac -- that's most of the work right there. Unless they somehow made it stupidly dependent on Cocoa, Linux would barely be a recompile from that.

      DirectX stomps OpenGL in current day form, and that buys you 90% of the cross-platform that is PC and XBox

      It doesn't buy you the 360, not entirely. If it does, I count the PS3 and the Wii for OpenGL.

      And you're not comparing apples to apples. I don't think Direct3D is any better than OpenGL. DirectX is better, because it does more than just graphics -- so the fair comparison would be DirectX vs SDL.

      And given how well UT2004 does, I think a good game engine should be able to switch between the two, without too much trouble.

      Visual Studio and DirectX arn't quite the utter pieces of shit that the OS is,

      True enough. But having used both Visual Studio and Eclipse, I'm not sure I would want Visual Studio back.

      I don't see Windows being threatened anytime soon in the gaming market.

      True. But it doesn't make a Linux/BSD port any less cool. (That's most of the reason I impulse-bought the Penny Arcade game.)

      And remember Doom 3? Pushed GL ahead by at least a year from where it was, I imagine. Most developers insist on DirectX, true, but it only takes one big game to make the manufacturers start to get their shit together.

      Lastly:

      if you wanna program a generation into the future, OpenGL is trailing developer expectations while MS has been much more consistent with regards to their announcements of whats coming up.

      If you wanna program a generation into the future, it doesn't matter -- you need both, and more. You need your engine to be so rock solid and agile that if Intel suddenly makes a cheap 500-core card that speaks x86, you'll be able to render on it before GL or DirectX.

      Granted, that's a bit aggressive, but I know how poorly game engines have done, traditionally -- game development in particular tends to lag years behind the rest of the world, mostly because of performance hacks to squeeze out another couple frames per second.

      I'm not entirely sure if the modern GL ports of Doom even use less CPU than the purely-software renderer Doom came with. But that kind of shows the endgame of an overly-optimized engine -- how many modern features could we actually add to the original Doom? Ramps, even? We have enough CPU now to run probably hundreds of instances of Doom on a single machine, so the optimizations no longer matter, but the lack of features and portability does -- I imagine much of the "porting" is taking old assembly routines and rewriting them in C.

      Blech. I'm rambling, and it's 4 AM. Sorry to be so abrupt... Let me know what you think.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  5. Dangerous. by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think that policy is a fine policy, assuming that the copy protection was at least risk-free -- that is, assuming that if you bought the game legitimately, if it didn't work, you could just upgrade with a patch in a month, and the protection is gone.

    Well, it's not risk-free.

    Some of these CD schemes, in particular, have actually installed drivers which screw up things like DVD burning. Some have installed rootkits. There's really no way for a gamer to know that it's completely gone -- and if there was a bug in it, there's no way to know that we could completely remove it.

    Parent has a point, though:

    The reason you should remove CD copy protection from your game is that it doesn't work -- at all, ever, the game's cracked before release, and people can make perfect copies.

    The second reason is that CD copy protection can be so intrusive as to drive legitimate customers to piracy -- which means that it has to have a significant benefit to justify that risk. It doesn't.

    So, if CD copy protection is such a clear net loss, what's the point? Why would you want to only shoot yourself in the foot for a month, instead of, say, not shooting yourself in the fucking foot?

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  6. Oh, for the good old days . . . by MarkvW · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Back in the '80s when things were fresh and new, I remember the eagerness with which I went to Egghead/Babbage's to look at the computer games.

    There was so much variety in the games. People were trying all sorts of different things. These games were not hundred-megabyte heavyweight games, they were much lighter--but they were more interesting.

    Now everything is so similar. The gaming mags freak out over frame rate and animation quality. I could care less. I value freshness and cleverness much more.

    My wife plays, and loves, the popcap kind of games on the internet. They are nothing special at all, but she likes them because they are novel and fun.

    I think I had more fun playing the original ASCII empire game and CIV II than I get playing later, overwrought, Sid Meier games (and he designs among the best).

    The massive multiplayer games could be tons of fun, but there's no way I'm putting down a subscription to play.

    All the damn game publishers are trying to hit home runs all the time, like the movie industry. That sucks. I'd rather see a lot more variety out there, like in the '80s.

    Anyway--that's my gripe.

  7. Well it isn't dead like some claim by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Informative

    But I think it is heading in a dangerous direction. No big deal yet, but if it continues it could be headed down a bad path.

    Basically there are three somewhat related problems right now:

    1) Console first releases. Many games are coming out for consoles first, and then only later being ported to PC. Now while there are PC gamers who only own a PC (I'm one of them) there are people who own consoles and PCs. This leads to artificially lower PC sales on a given title. Someone may prefer playing a given kind of game on their PC, but if they have to wait, they may elect not to and get the console version instead. They are then unlikely to buy the PC version as well. For example I have a friend who owns a 360, a PS3 and a gaming PC (yes he has too much money). When Mass Effect came out, he wanted it right away and got the 360 version. He'd rather have the PC version, PC controls are nicer for a game like that not to mention the ability to hack around with it for more replayability, however he isn't going to buy it twice. Thus the PC version sees lower sales than it might otherwise.

    2) Poor PC ports. Consoles and PCs work real different in terms of controls, as anyone who's messed with both can tell you. So if you want to do a game for both, and do it right, you have to spend time making two versions. You need to customize it to work well on it's various platforms. Same deal with multiple consoles, actually. However, there are an increasing number of games developed for the console, and then kinda half-ass ported to the PC. They don't play well, they don't feel like a PC game, and they often don't work very well. Leads to a situation where you are getting an inferior experience playing on the PC. This again leads to lower PC game sales. If a game comes out for PC and 360 and you've got both, you'll get the 360 version if the PC version sucks, even if you much prefer PC gaming.

    3) DRM/copyprotection problems. The DRM on PC games is getting more and more problematic. Time was, you really had next to zero problems with it. All that it was is some areas of the disc not normally used (like subchannels and stuff) messed with and a little wrapper around the executable. Worked on essentially every system since everything was within the CD standards, and there wasn't any system level trickery. Now this was, of course, easy for pros to defeat. Well the DRM companies can't seem to understand that his is a fight you can't win, you can't give someone an encrypted file, the decryption key, and expect that they can't use that to their own ends, so they keep upping the ante to counter new tools. Thus now we have extremely complicated DRM that causes lots of problems on lots of systems. It is quite possible to buy a retail game and have it say your disc isn't valid (happened to be with Civ 4 BTS). Hell in some cases the DRM can even fuck up your system. Well this also leads to lower sales.

    So what is happening is that various publishers are seeing lower PC sales, especially as compared to the console market. So they then get this "Well fuck the PC, let's do console only," idea, especially since they incorrectly seem to believe consoles are immune from game copying (someone should point them to the Games > XBOX360 category on TPB). Now that could spell a problem for PC gaming, since it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. They do stupid things that reduce PC sales, so they see lower sales, so they don't want to work at making PC games, which leads to lower PC sales, etc.

    So no, PC gaming isn't in dire straits or anything, and hell it'll be alive and well in some form so long as casual games and MMOs continue to find their stronghold on the PC market. However, the direction it is heading isn't a good one. Better to notice this and deal with it while things are still healthy, than to wait until it's a crisis (see the current mortgage problems).