Slashdot Mirror
99.8% of Gamers Don't Care About DRM, Says EA
arcticstoat writes "If you thought that EA might have been humbled by the massive Internet backlash against its use of SecuROM in its recent games, then you'd be wrong. Speaking at the Dow Jones/Nielsen Media and Money Conference, EA's CEO John Riccitiello claimed that the whole issue had been blown out of all proportion. 'We implemented a form of DRM and it's something that 99.8 per cent of users wouldn't notice,' claimed Riccitiello, 'but for the other 0.2 percent, it became an issue and a number of them launched a cabal online to protest against it.'"
If you query the number of gamers you have left, of course you're going to get a 99.8% figure. (Though honestly, that exact figure sounds like bullshit to me. Did you know that 85.7% of all statistics are made up on the spot?) The question is, how many customers have you already lost where DRM was a contributing factor? Of those customers, how many can identify DRM as the problem rather than stating "the game doesn't work"?
I almost guarantee that any study EA has done resulting in these figures was flawed. Based on his statements however, I don't think EA has done that research. Riccitiello pulled that number out of thin air. Even if EA did research that suggests that only 0.2% of users should have a problem, there's a huge gap between theory and practice.
I'm an example of a PC gamer lost by the industry. I used to read PC Gamer regularly, wait for the awesome new titles coming out, and get lost in the worlds of these games. Eventually I stopped and gave up on the industry. If you're interesting in why, here are the key points:
-- Lackluster games. The majority of games felt like regurgitated first person shooters. They were all the same with new skins. Hardly an interesting market.
-- Technological problems. There's nothing more irritating than purchasing a game or getting a game as a gift, then not being able to run it. At least two of those instances were clearly DRM problems. The games would not even start. No error, no reason, just fail. Tech support then explains some BS about having a CD Burner. Because, you know, those are so uncommon in computers. (This guy explains it WAY better than I can.) Not to mention the video card driver treadmill. Having problems with that game? Oh, well you need to update to Super Destructo Detonation Drivers version 34120123.1239213213 release 8231 patch -0123 revision B. It will make your system super-unstable, but your games will kick ass!
-- Time. As I got older, I simply had fewer hours in the day to game. I no longer have the time nor the patience to work around the previous two problem. So I just stopped buying PC games. Nowhere was there a concious decision of "screw them", it was simply, "This does not interest me anymore".
These days I have a console that lets me get the maximum amount of enjoyment out of the least possible time investment. Life is so much better than when PC games clogged my system's arteries.
In closing, I'd like to say this: History has shown that good games sell. Period, end of story. Piracy has always been and always will be a scapegoat for the real problem of poor quality merchandise. Implementing draconian anti-piracy measures will only drive away the few customers you have left.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
If gamers knew that installing a game had a chance of damaging their CD Burner, or causing crashes in non-game activities, requiring a system reformat I bet they would care. As it is, they blame "computers" and do not care.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
If 99.8% of the customers don't have an issue with the DRM (presumably they are not restricted in what they are doing), why have it implemented in the first place?
DRM has the purpose of restricting what one can do with a digital product - be it a game, a song, whatever. If no-one ever runs into those restrictions, it's been a waste of effort. However if the restrictions are tight and many people run into them, they are presumably effective for what the manufacturer wanted, but will result in customers trying to circumvent it as they want to do things they are not allowed to out of the box. Such as making a back-up copy.
So either DRM is a priori ineffective (restrictions so loose no-one notices them, so there is no effect of the DRM) to prevent complaints, or it is effective in restricting people but then will guaranteed result in protests and circumvention, rendering it ineffective after all.
I agree with EA's assessment (althought 99.8% is rather high, 80% is probably more accurate). MOST people don't care about DRM restrictions... ...until EA, like Wlmart, turns off the servers and makes your $50 game worthless. ...or they try to play the game on their shiny-new Vista or Windows 7 computer, and the OS rejects it.
A lot of people don't realize how bad DRM can be until they get bit on the butt by a non-functioning piece of software or music or video.
The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
It was sort of the other way around for me.
I got tired of console games that were buggy/poorly tested etc. and could NOT be patched. I was stuck with the first release version.
PC games at least gave me the aftermarket to fix problems with a game. When I could get inside them, or utilize cracks or whatnot, I began to see more cost value in a PC game. Yeah, I realize that in a perfect world, the games should be perfect on release, but they are not. For that simple reason, I choose to buy a product that at least gives me some latitude in making the fucking thing work to MY liking.
80% is significantly different than 99.8%.
Put another way, I'm sure they can fool themselves into thinking that 0.2% of their customers would've pirated the game if not for DRM.
But if it's 80%, is there really any chance that they'd lose more than 20% of their customers to piracy, if not for DRM?
For that matter, would any business be wise to make a decision that alienates a fucking fifth of their customer base?
EA, I really wanted to buy Mirror's Edge. I was almost considering buying a console for it, so I wouldn't have to deal with the DRM. But with this attitude, I'm sorry, you're not getting a dime of my money, or a minute of my time.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
I will agree up to this point. Gamers breaking down and getting the game. Most gamers I know are completely competent in finding and retrieving torrents. If DRM is too intrusive they *will* go pirate it even if they had intended to buy it. Others will actually buy the game, park in on a shelf and download the torrent. DRM, in some cases, can actually encourage piracy due to the intrusiveness of it. I, personally, will never buy another EA game due to this thinly veiled virus masquerading as DRM. I know other gamers that will pirate it instead because they don't want their game systems compromised. EA apparently doesn't understand the gaming community especially on the PC side. Even the 80% number that some have purposed as more accurate may be a bit high.
If the DRM is not that intrusive (only makes copying the CD difficult but not impossible) then, while I still dislike it, I will deal with it. Otherwise, I will just take a pass.