Zeta Posted January 20, 2008 Report Posted January 20, 2008 I think the way forward is aggressive anti piracy measures from the time of launch, up untill perhaps a month later, and internet based verification systems such as steam. By having a relatively short term aggressive system people who are really eager to play will have no alternative but to buy the product if they want it. Cooling off on the restrictions (of limited installs or whatever the chosen defence is), after a month or so, would lessen any irritation or complications a small percentage of the consumers might experience. Verification systems like steam are also going to become vital if companies are serious about tackling piracy, unless there is a dramatic increase in the strength of copy protection (which consumers hate anyway and put them off purchasing products featuring them), quantum security perhaps. :megaman:
m8nkey Posted January 20, 2008 Report Posted January 20, 2008 I'm with Warby on this one Zete. As a legitimate customer, anti piracy measures shit me to tears. An encumbering security system is just going to irritate and alienate your legitimate customers and will have negligable effect on piracy. Another posible issue is that business models, copyright, fair use, and the concept of intellectual property are all decades behind current digital technology. It's just too easy to anonymously steal software. If people could anonymously steal LCD tvs and cars from the convenience of their living room, as they can digital media, there'd be plenty of that going on too. I do agree with Zete that Steam is a great distribution system (though by no means perfect). It's cool being able to log into an online system that retains your entire library without requiring cd keys etc. The verification system is very unobtrusive.
hessi Posted January 20, 2008 Report Posted January 20, 2008 but online distribution isnt perfect at all! just to throw in a point: "social engineering" many users don't think about losing their accounts through phishing etc. of course we know which site to trust, but tell that a 12 or 13 year old.
Fletch Posted January 20, 2008 Report Posted January 20, 2008 A little bit of analysis: -Making games to run on crappier PCs - It's a mixed bag. There are a lot of developers out there who do this, but they're not the big ones. There just isn't a lot of money in it, unless you find a very particular niche (Sims and WoW being good examples). For a hundred entrances into the lower-end market, only 1 or 2 survives to profitability, so it makes publishers balk at throwing big money at it. Also, a lot of companies and developers work hand in hand with hardware manufacturers. New games are released, which push sales of higher end video cards and processors, which then create a market for more games to enter at that tech level. That relationship is bottoming out, though. The problem comes down to standardization. Pick 50 people on this forum, and I'll doubt that there are even 2 PCs that have the same tech specs. That's hard to test for. There are a lot of new PCs coming out with huge processing power, but no graphics card, and 3 year old computers with huge graphics cards and no processing power. The market is just ridiculously fractioned. That has to be solved first, before you see more entries to the low/mid-level PC market. Having no copy-protection - Hahahahaha. Yeah, and it would be great if I shit donuts. Not going to happen. You're asking a huge publisher to take a product they put millions into and not have copy-protection? What are you smoking, and can I have some? I know it's annoying, but let's face it, the PC gamer community has done zilch to develop any sort of trust with the publishers. The piracy rate is huge, and people in this very thread and just completely un-repentant about it. Explain why we should have any motivation to help you out. You think putting in a CD-Key is annoying? Try getting shorted on a paycheck because of low sales. That's really fucking annoying. Demo's suck/Reviews suck - As I've said before, the internet is pretty big, and you're all smart people. Surely you can find some sort of reviewer you trust. Go to Game Rankings or Metacritic. Get a sampling of voices. Find some blogs you trust. Read forums. Complaining that you can't find any good review information is just lazy. It's going to take you a few hours to pirate a game. Use that time to read some stuff first. Developers should be more creative, then they'll make more money - Again, that's a shitting donuts argument. In ary project you work on, you've got a variable amount of control over the creativity of your work. Sometimes you can go crazy with ideas/art/graphics/etc. Other times you can't. I know plenty of artists working for EA, who come in on Monday, and have 3 days to make a trash can model. Then they get 3 days to make a parking meter. Sometimes you're in the trenches and you just have to complete a solid task. It's part of the job. Other times you've got to cut some really cool features because you just don't have the time/manpower/ability to properly implement them. If it comes down to cutting a feature, or missing a release window, you're going to cut the feature. I don't mean to make the industry sound boring (it's not) or devoid of creativity (it's not), but you're balancing creativity with running a business all the time. Creativity doesn't pay the rent. My final prediction: The PC market in 5 years will only be games that require secure login (WoW, BF2/2142, Steam, etc), probably coupled with digital distribution. It's the only way it will work from here on out. You've got to be connected, validated, and tied to an account with an e-mail, address, and probably credit card. It's the only way to stop piracy in a significant way. In the mean time, consoles are going to continue to rule the market. The profit margins are higher. The piracy rate is lower, the standardization of hardware provides a bigger market. It's just superior on all front when it comes to the business side of the industry
Minos Posted January 20, 2008 Report Posted January 20, 2008 I personally see pirating as something reasonable when you're in school/college as games are relatively expensive, but once you're out of your teens and have a job it's time to grow up and start paying for your shit, regardless of whether or not it might be a bit crap. Almost all games have demos, including Crysis, so there's no excuse for not getting the demo and seeing how it runs/plays/etc. Anyone who's past their teens and still pirates games needs to grow the fuck up IMO. Try the demos and/or read reviews before buying -- it's not hard, and it's how consumers of most other industries buy stuff. For example if you're buying a kettle and want to know how fast it boils and such, just ask the shop for a demo and read some reviews (online, kitchen magazines, etc) about it. I totally agree with Thrik. I don't buy games because I'm lazy or anything, it's just that I can't buy them. I have stressed it several times but games are rather expensive here... won't get into this shit again but I'll use an example instead: Playstation 2 games used to cost from 200 to 300 bucks back in 2003. In 2006 they cost between 99 and 200. And now they cost around 49 bucks, which is definitely a good price. But now they are old games with old tech, not appealing at all. And then they wonder why people pirate games... (an xbox 360 game costs around 250 - 300 at the moment, while the console costs 2000). Of course that's brazilian currency, but it's a 2:1 ratio for USD. I plan on buying my own games as soon as I get a decent job and if they have good prices.
⌐■_■ Posted January 20, 2008 Report Posted January 20, 2008 wow.. those prices are simply ridiculous.. :-|
Ginger Lord Posted January 20, 2008 Report Posted January 20, 2008 I'm not a fan of piracy but as a student its rampant round here. Havn't pirated any games for a while, last one was Hitman Blood Money but I went and bought that off Steam the other week as its a cracker and wasn't extortionatly priced like new games. £39.99 or £44.99 ($80-90) for a new game.... its a compelling reason for some not to buy things, hell thats a fortnights worth of food and groceries for me on a game. Now if new games were £19.99, I'd see them being pirated less.
zaphod Posted January 21, 2008 Report Posted January 21, 2008 This is a fun thread It's interesting to see the how different some people's opinions are on this. I think it's pretty pointless for developers to be crying "but it's not fair! You shouldn't pirate games because it's morally reprehensible! You are taking food out of my mouth!" While all those things may be true to you personally, that means just about ZERO to the average consumer - and screaming from the moral high ground to the people below while at the same time flapping your arms around saying the sky is falling is just plain masturbatory. The PC market is the way it is, and no amount of preaching or PSA's or big developer doe eyes are going to change it. Either don't address the issue and keep releasing your PC games they way they are and take the piracy hit, change the way you do business and address the issue, or get out of the PC market. Adapt (Digital Distribution), Migrate (Consoles), or Die. Buying games is not a personal thing for most people. People's actions are driven by cost, convenience, and value - and if someone pirates a game because it falls short in one of these categories, the task to adjust the product to fit correctly in these categories in order to fit the target audience is completely on the people producing the product. God I love steam. You know why? Because I can purchase, download, install and play a game faster and easier than I could find a torrent, download a game, install and crack it. What a novel fucking idea! If it's more convenient for someone to download a game illegally, than it is to buy it legally - maybe it's time to look at how we deliver games. I seem to remember something about the music industry at the beginning of this decade and how some companies adapted to top the convenience of digital piracy, and some did not. I am completely pro-DRM because when it is done the right way, it's in the best interests of the copyright owners AND the consumers. Look at WoW. Have you ever heard of anybody lamenting how they wish they could pirate a copy of WoW because it would be more convenient or they can't afford to pay? No, you don't. You know why? Because they provide a service that is so valuable to it's customers that they wouldn't dream of pirating it. People WANT to pay to play WoW. They have so much value invested in this game that they gladly pay a monthly fee in order to keep it secure. Digitally distribute your games, reduce the price by whatever you are saving on dvd production, packaging, shipping, and paying off gamestop and wallmart for a good spot on the shelf. Tie it to a username, pay by credit card. It's 2008, if someone thinks that doing business that way is "ookie" then lose them as a customer. When you come out with a good game and the only way to get it is via that system, they will use it. But it had better be convenient, and if you come up with your own service your game had better be fucking stellar becuase customers aren't going to sign up on 8 different services just to play your game unless it's gold. And every single person who plays your game will have bought it, and developers will receive more of what they deserve - money from the wallets of the players. Not money from gamestop who gave it to EA who gave it to shareholders, who generously gifted a fraction to a development company who gives a smaller fraction to an artist or a programmer. but in short - developers u guyz no fair!!! stop teh piratingz u maek us sad we arent gunna make u games ne more!!! consumers lol wuteveer I am fine w/ it. Pirating games is easy and cheap. Buying games is hard and expensive. I am getting everything I want! developers don't u realizing u r hurting our business? consumers :megaman: lul wat? I cant hear u i am playing cod4 multiplayer. I just downloaded it in liek an hour. They don't even lock out pirated keys lol developers :-| developers what if we made it even easier to get and play our games than downloading them? You will jus liek click and then you will be playing! We even cud liek let u play it wherever you want, and liek see what other games your friends are playing and other cool shit like that. consumers woot, lol dat is cool. I have 80 bucks saved up from sum gaem I pirated that I didn't want to go to da store 2 get cuz I am lazy and i liek to do things easy since I am a consumer and dats wat i liek. yea, thats (a tad) oversimplified, and I'm sure everyone has a ton of opinions that are 100% opposite from mine as a developer but thats what makes it my opinion and not yours.
zaphod Posted January 22, 2008 Report Posted January 22, 2008 Having no copy-protection - Hahahahaha. Yeah, and it would be great if I shit donuts. Not going to happen. You're asking a huge publisher to take a product they put millions into and not have copy-protection? What are you smoking, and can I have some? I know it's annoying, but let's face it, the PC gamer community has done zilch to develop any sort of trust with the publishers. The piracy rate is huge, and people in this very thread and just completely un-repentant about it. Explain why we should have any motivation to help you out. You think putting in a CD-Key is annoying? Try getting shorted on a paycheck because of low sales. That's really fucking annoying. this is like some kind of bizzaro argument from bizzaro land. It almost seems like you think developers hold some kind of awesome power over consumers and they had better be nice or they won't get the magnificent creations you are hoarding. News flash, commercial game developers exist to serve the consumers, not the other way around. The PC gamer community has some kind of obligation to instill trust with game publishers? Please publisher man! Please let me prove myself worthy to consume your generous products! Why should you have any motivation to try and change things so that pirates will buy your game instead of pirating them? Well I would assume it's because you want them as a customer otherwise I don't know what this entire argument is about.
jaboo224 Posted January 22, 2008 Report Posted January 22, 2008 I agree with almost exactly what Zaphod said. But i also dont agree that pc gaming is dieing, i just think it is starting to go with a different direction. MMORPG's are showing the highest numbers now rather than the good ol FPS like Counterstrike. If World of Warcraft can get massive profits monthly from 6 million people then its pretty obvious they are going to continue developing for pc's. Same with Valve, they have a loyal audience that offers great service, cheap products and high value. I mean Steam has been nothing but great even before hl2 was released. I bought HL2 Silver package when it first was on preorder and i got a very nice package that i would never regret buying. They did the same thing with Orange box and even the values you get with buying a HL1 bundle pack (cs, cscz, dod, hl1, blueshift and opposing force) let alone a great modding community you are getting more than what you pay for. It is games that feel like Ports and poor hashes and crappy attempts to promote something odd that doesnt make me want a game. For example BF2142.... This game which i bought i regret doing so, not because of the quality of the game but because i bought it through EALINK.... Service was terrible, download was incredibly slow and chogged down my system. As well that they essentially stuck a 60$ price tag on a game with the same gameplay as BF2.... I dont think PC gaming will die but will go in a different direction. More focus on package deals and all around good customer service like valve and blizzard have been delivering.
zaphod Posted January 22, 2008 Report Posted January 22, 2008 I think the console market will continue forward as the main stage for bigger and bigger budget blockbuster games. I think the PC platform will continue to be the groundbreaking platform for innovation, service-based games that don't function as well within the framework of a closed platform (mmo's and similar), as well other games that don't fit into the blockbuster console mold. There are certain types of games an applications that will always flourish better on an open and un-regulated platform.
Taylor Posted January 22, 2008 Report Posted January 22, 2008 Surely the PC needs to start being the groundbreaking platform for innovation before it can continue being it? I've never heard someone mention that word without games like Ico, SotC, Okami or Katamari Damacy coming into the conversation immediately, maybe with a muffled Portal, I will grant you - but then again, there's the Wii... And you seem to be implying the consoles only do blockbuster titles? I deleted my several attempts to counter argue that because I was getting irate. They most certainly do, hell they're pushing to get small teams cranking stuff out on their highly convenient digital distribution methods as much as possible - that’s basically what XNA and C# are for, and Sony threw Everyday Shooter up double quick time. Sure, stuff like Halo and God of War get sales and publicity, lots of both, but there's still enough love for the cult titles by Nippion Ichi (purely for example) for them to stay profitable. I was also half-heartedly arguing here that Final Fantasy XI was a (partially) console-based subscription game that enjoyed large success, but I think I've posted enough indirect venom for a crushing, face-burning riposte when I check this tomorrow anyway.
zaphod Posted January 22, 2008 Report Posted January 22, 2008 I'm basing my statement on the fact that on any closed platform, innovation has to be funded and recognized by a commercial company and will utilized as a commercial tool. On a completely open platform developers can be literally anybody and can can spread their work at anytime anywhere for any goal. Hell, I don't even think that innovation is really the greatest goal to be going after, but I think the PC platform has any closed console beat hands down in terms of being the best platform for innovation. I didn't say that consoles only have blockbuster games, I said they will continue to be the main stage for them.
Quakis Posted January 22, 2008 Report Posted January 22, 2008 I don't think my post will add much to the discussion, but oh well. Personally, I don't pirate any new games. The only games that I have downloaded are much older ones, mostly because I'm having trouble finding a hard copy of it somewhere, ex. Realms of the Hauntings. As for newer games, I don't since I try to be careful where I'm spending my money. Some games if they're given (or asked) as gifts I can risk for a title I'm not sure about but I tend to wait for titles to either get cheaper or find a second hand copy. If that doesn't work then I check up on peoples opinions on the said title. I visit the 3DRealms board and the general gaming section is the best place I've been to see such opinions so far. I can't see why people argue that reviews cant be trusted, since there are thousands of unofficial reviews out there. Demos are enough for me to judge a game, if it doesn't run well or I find it boring I wont bother paying out cash for it - but I rarely ever do check out demos yet I constantly see opinions of games I have an eye on. I don't yet have any work but with the money I do get somehow, I can manage getting the games I want to play and enjoy rather easily. I don't see why others can't, unless you're trying to go for every hyped game out there...
Taylor Posted January 22, 2008 Report Posted January 22, 2008 But if you want your game to sell it’s going to have to be published, and PC publishers are just as restrictive as their console counterparts (except maybe Nintendo). Where exactly is this slew of innovative games carrying the torch for the PC? I admit the potential is there, but the mainstream is still the same FPS stamped out with improved foliage. Also, you said the PC is the platform for “games that don't fit into the blockbuster console mold.” Pretty valid conclusion to draw from that, I think?
Recommended Posts