Slashdot Mirror
Stardock Evaluates DRM Complaints, Updates Gamer's Bill of Rights
Earlier this year, we discussed the Gamer's Bill of Rights, a document put forth by Stardock CEO Brad Wardell to address what he felt were the unacceptable characteristics of the gaming industry. ShackNews reports that Wardell has taken feedback from gamers, developers, and publishers, and updated the document accordingly. One particular area on which he focused was DRM. Stardock also published a customer report that examines the issue in greater detail (PDF). MTV's Multiplayer Blog fans the flames of the debate by asking if anyone is embarrassed about pirating video games.
When are they going to add another important point to the bill of rights:
11. Gamers shall have the right to play the game on the platform of their choosing.
Obviously, this whole bill of rights deal is for PC's and not consoles.
When I got my first job in the game industry, I stopped pirating anything. It was in my contract that I wouldn't, and even though they obviously never would have found out, it still wasn't something I would have felt good about.
I still hassle my roommates for pirating games that I worked on. While I'd never see any of the revenue myself (it's not like we get royalties or anything), it still really bothers me.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
But what's keeping all those gamers out there who don't pirate their games from standing up and saying they pay for what they play? From making not being a pirate a point of pride?
I paid for Spore. The DRM crashed my game. The seemingly incomplete game was enjoyable for as much as it accomplished. But I feel like a sucker for having paid money on it. I don't feel pride; I feel a small twinge of something akin to shame. I helped Electronic Arts dumb down a game (so they can piecemeal add-ons to eventually yield a complete game, sometime in the future) and distribute it with DRM (which interfered in my gameplay, which the pirated version would not have done). I helped them because I can't control my addiction to gaming.
That's why the cultural front would be a losing battle. To do the "legal" thing, I have to feel slightly embarrassed and used and out of control.
On the back of games.... this is what the game contains software wise...
and this is what changes the game will make to your system.
Inform the consumer of what kind of crap they are putting in their body/pc. Then the company has the ability to say it's on the box and the consumer can decide do I want more of the same or move on to something with a better ingredients list.
No, what bothers me is that I intimately understand the direct connection between piracy of a PC title en masse and the ensuing lack of employment of people who worked on said title if it underperforms "as a result". I'm not saying I agree with that proposed causal relationship, and I certainly understand that not every stolen copy is a lost sale - actually, almost everyone I've talked to in the business agrees - but piracy does hurt real people who make games, and therefore also dampens the quality of PC titles and the enthusiasm for the platform across the board.
It's a real problem out there.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
It's be fucking nice if they did release source code. What's the harm? Carmack did it.
How we know is more important than what we know.
I have good news. I found someone who stole one of your games, and he has agreed to mail you back the bits you're missing. I just need a return address.
occultae nullus est respectus musicae - originally a Greek proverb
I love it when Americans make the tipping analogy, because it's so apt. You are aware that the American system of tipping is insane, right? The rest of the world think you're all fuckin' nuts when you go on about this stuff. There's nothing normal about refusing to pay your staff a reasonable rate and then demanding the customer get involved in compensating them.
How we know is more important than what we know.
Not to nitpick, but I was pirating WAY before I had internet access (actually, more then than now). As to your question: C) No demo=no purchase.
I won't pay for something unless I know I want it. If I buy meat from a butcher and it's not good, I'll get my money back. That option is not available to me as a consumer with software, so I try before I buy.
If I purchase a copy of the game, I *DO* own it. Otherwise, I have the right to get a replacement and or refund if my CD or DVD gets scratched. Does that really happen? I don't think so.
If we gave money and got a CD, it's not a license. It's a sale. Especially when you go to the website and see the words "purchase", "order" and "buy". See Vernor v. Autodesk. A good review of the decision is available at http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080523-court-smacks-autodesk-affirms-right-to-sell-used-software.html
So what DRM is really about, is an attempt at circumventing the first sale doctrine. Therefore, it should be declared illegal.
There's a significant lack of respect for my work inherent in the statement they make by stealing a game I've worked on. The way it comes across to me is, "I know you spent hours of your life working on the thing that's entertaining me right now, and I think those hours were worth a total of zero dollars."
That is not their statement, that's your assumption.
Most hardcore pirates that I know are very much into promoting cool stuff and sharing it with others because they think it is really cool. They don't waste energy on crap. In part it gives them status in their community when they are able to turn people on to something impressive. This behavior seems to be normal human nature - sharing cool stuff regardless of what it is - is an inherent part of the human social animal.
You can choose to feel insulted by it, but feeling that way won't change anything and it makes you unhappy in the process.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
No, what bothers me is that I intimately understand the direct connection between piracy of a PC title en masse and the ensuing lack of employment of people who worked on said title if it underperforms "as a result". I'm not saying I agree with that proposed causal relationship, and I certainly understand that not every stolen copy is a lost sale - actually, almost everyone I've talked to in the business agrees - but piracy does hurt real people who make games, and therefore also dampens the quality of PC titles and the enthusiasm for the platform across the board.
It's a real problem out there.
The counter-argument to that is that DRM hurts your customers in very real ways as well, while it has little to no impact on pirates. Hell, I can't even play my copy of UT2004 now because I lost my CD key last time I moved. What else do I own that I could permanently lose just because I can't find a little card with like 16 characters on it?
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
The parent is correct. Their games do require you to run their Impulse client to download game updates.
A recent update to Impulse did actually install background services without asking the user's permission. This was their solution to slow app launch times, by invisibly launching the service at boot time, rather than actually fixing the problem.
GameRanger - multiplayer gaming service for PC and Mac games
When an game is sold $60, it is sold here in Europe for 60 Euro. You do the change back and tada: $100. :(
Now "Hundreds of dollard of games" start with only 1
You are delusional if you really think only 1% of people who spend days downloading ripped copies of crysis, who own a machine that will play that game, would buy it if they couldn't pirate it.
Pirates always kid themselves they wouldn't have bought the game, because if they don't tell themselves that they realise they are just stealing.
(Insert lame and totally retarded comment about !I just copied it!111 here)
You have no idea how many games I've downloaded, burned to a disc, and then never touched again. Obviously I wasn't going to buy those games. I couldn't even be bothered to load them up and play them. I buy about 6 or 7 games a year, and probably pirate twice that many.
The problem is that I just never actually get around to playing them. Or they get installed, played for an hour or so, and then wiped because they just aren't really interesting enough to play. Bioshock is a good example of that. I played it for a few hours one evening, then never touched it again. Seems like more and more games are coming out that just aren't even worth playing.
No way I'm putting money down without trying them first. Need to make sure that they'll even run to begin with. Demos don't cut it. They tend to hint at possibilities that just don't materialize. Things that were hyped by the developer, but end up being bullshit. Again, Bioshock is a good example. So is Oblivion with its revolutionary *snort* Radiant AI. I swear I was going to just stab every fucker that talked about hating mud crabs. If developers would quit fucking lying to us, stop using DRM that doesn't even affect pirates, stop preventing us from returning a game that doesn't work, and stop preventing us from re-selling a game when we're done with it, I don't think I'd have any real reason to pirate games anymore.
Thought exercise:
If the internet did not exist and you could not pirate any given game, would you
A.) Not buy a game you were fairly interested in but not positive about?
or
B.) Buy a game you were fairly interested in but not positive about?
If you're like most people, I'm guessing the answer is that sometimes you would do A, sometimes B.
If you're like me, you've been burned too many times in the past to ever trust most developers again. With only a couple of exceptions who I give the benefit of the doubt to, I have to try a game before I will decide whether to buy it or not. Even if I get home and it won't run at all, I can't return it.
Developers think that all they have to do is entice you with enough bullshit hype about how awesome their game is to get you to buy it, and then when you realize that they were bullshitting all along, they already have your money and you can't return it.
Even a demo can be made to seem awesome, and make you think that if you could just keep playing a bit further you'd get to experience the awesomeness that they've been telling you about for the last couple years. But you'll probably be wrong. Maybe I'm jaded now, but it's asshole developers (and really publishers more often than developers) that have made me that way.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Go read up on copyright, as part of the 'deal' that is copyright, the rights to the item are supposed to become public after copyright runs out (which is getting longer and longer, but that aint the point).
With DRM, how exactly is the public going to get their free access that has been bought and paid for by supplying (through the state..) the protection of the product during its copyright life?
Any copyright holder who uses DRM that does not time out at the end of copyright is reneging on their half of the contract that is copyright, so why should they get any protection through it?
State Copyright OR Private DRM, I say. No state protection for DRM!
3-40% of pirated copies is a silly number, where would that kind of money come from? All the pirates I know already spends alot of money on games/movies/music, they can't materialize money out of thin air to pay for the content they're currently pirating.
I already have a DRM Bill of Rights.
It's called Thepiratebay. No DRM. Working cracks and good serials. No anti-user crap.
Why pay to get punished when pirating works better?
After purchasing Mass Effect I used a crack to circumvent the activation. I felt...unclean for paying a company to treat me like that. I decided that I would take a moral stand on the issue and so I will not buy any more games with crazy DRM on them (I did the same with Starforce). Now however I am in something of a quandary, should I:
a) Be strong! Not only will I not purchase these products, I will not use them in any way. A total boycott.
b) Be pragmatic! The publisher will label me a lost sale due to piracy anyway so why not see for myself what everyone is talking about?
I intially chose A so as to lend weight to my statement, but my voice goes unheard. Drowned in a sea of corporate propaganda. B appears ever more attractive (and self-serving, admittedly.)
The seriousness of the above post is not guaranteed.
It's funny. Because here tipping is not considered mandatory, there is no *expectation* of a tip, and thus, if I really like the service I got, I can give an average tip.
The tipping system in the US is insane. Waitresses should be paid normal wages, and should get tips only as reward for good service (or physical contact, for those so inclined).