Slashdot Mirror
EA Won't Use DRM For The Sims 3
After taking heavy criticism for the use of SecuROM in Spore and other games, EA has made the decision to go back to simple serial code authentication for The Sims 3. EA's Rod Humble said simply, "We feel like this is a good, time-proven solution that makes it easy for you to play the game without DRM methods that feel overly invasive or leave you concerned about authorization server access in the distant future."
EA's track record isn't the greatest, but if they go through with it, it's a step in the right direction. Getting everyone pissed off with DRM then suddenly reversing your stance is good PR too.
Could it be that EA's actually listening to their customers? This isn't a cheap publicity stunt like Ubisoft pulled with Prince of Persia; this is (arguably) EA's flagship product.
...but good for EA, so long as they follow through with this. I think a simple serial code authorization system has worked just fine for much of the software I own. It's never felt overly onerous to me. I keep the serial code safe right along with the install disk, and I've often (years later) re-installed and replayed those games. Simple, and strikes a reasonable balance between some protection for the publisher / developer and reasonable use for the customer.
And of course, I see a tag on the article "serialdrm". Seriously, no one is going to get much traction whining about "serial code DRM". At that point, I'm gonna call bullshit and figure you just enjoy complaining.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
I think serial keys are necessary. They stop casual copying from being prevalent. Many people are not willing or knowledgeable enough to go through the time/effort to download a torrent, mess with keygenerators and/or no-cd cracks, and then possibly still be blocked from online pay. Without serial keys, anyone could just buy say, an RTS like AoE3 and install it on all your friends computers real quick so you can play together online. There has to be a balance, and I feel serial keys are a nice compromise, since it really doesn't require additional effort on my part, and I can even resell my software, because it is truly mine.
I agree with you on a theoretical level. But the reality of the situation is much different. The fact that EA has realized that treating their customers like criminals is not good business practice is a vast improvement and I can only hope that other developers follow suit.
"Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
they probably recognized that the DRM actually encouraged us to seek out and download cracked versions....
Because it's one of their biggest-selling franchises. If it sells poorly than hoped, they can play the piracy card and ramp up DRM on all future titles with a smug "We told you so". If it sells well, it may encourage them to relax DRM on other games in the future. It's a game that's likely to sell well even with piracy, so relatively low-risk.
And tomorrow the stock exchange will be the human race
Seriously, a serial code is the most simplistic and effective means of copy protection.
One key = one install
If you implement measures, that online / LAN multiplay is restricted to valid and unique CD-keys and executables cannot be cracked easily is one of the most reasonable methods to balance between players and publishers available.
It serves the following purposes:
- prevent non-paying customers from using unpaid-for online servers
- (inofficially) let people (via keygens) rather freely test-drive the full software, offline on their own machine with the option to buy a key and make your installation legit and online-enabled in seconds.
- ban detected cheaters from online play and introduce a financial risk to cheating (you have to buy a new key when you're caught) which deters non-hardcore cheaters from trying
- prevent mass copying of your software: if the same key is encountered online in the thousands, disable the key
- all this encourages defined and responsible ownership of the software: if you give out your key, you possibly cannot play online anymore
- and inofficially: limit the resale-value of a used key: as a buyer, you cannot be sure if the key is not banned for cheating or shared with the entire school/workplace of the reseller.
I don't know of people who been hindered from doing legit things with their paid-for software because of a cd-key. But I know several people who "test-drove" dozens of pirated games with a keygen who found out the game was so crappy that even downloading it was a waste of money and time.
Dongle checks present pretty much the same downsides as optical-media based copy protection and is probably worked-around as easily.
Unfortunately, companies complain about these dongles to be too expensive. But I like the idea of these, simply because USB-sticks are pretty tough.
You could also contain the entire game AND the copy protection ready-to-boot on a write-protected USB stick, making the game easy to re-sale, play, legitimately loan out etc. - if you have the USB stick, you have the game, the serial key and the means to run it in an instant.
Losing a USB-stick attached with a keychain is much harder than accidentally scratching the surface of a delicate optical disk, where every bad sector is an important input to the copy-protection mechanism. I personally bought two or three copies of Starcraft-Brood War because the copy-protection used there is non-standard and incredibly vulnerable to even the tiniest scratches.
Now that 4GB USB sticks cost less than 10USD retail, I'd thought we finally get ready-to-play sticks which include all and everything.
Used game sales aren't good for the original developer. If a game is bought for $50, then resold four times for $10-30 each time, how much does the original developer make? $50. Epic Games has voiced their opinion on the issue, and has taken measures to discourage the practice (unlocks/DLC).
Yes, but people are more likely to pay more for it if they know they can turn around and sell it and get some of that money back when they get tired of it.
My concern isn't that killing the used market is better for devs. My concern is that it shouldn't be legal whether it is better or not. There needs to be a balance between consumers and publishers. TPB probably isn't it, but neither is Spore...