DRM May Get Messy As Companies Fight For Control

No one can deny that the internet has been quite crazy when it comes to the Xbox One. A large part of that has been due to Microsoft's poor PR, but also because fans are just very passionate. Now that Microsoft has chosen to break away from its previous position on DRM and Online Requirements, there's a storm brewing that many do not see. Perhaps it was already upon us, but developers are going to start taking matters into their own hands.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Donnieboi1937d ago

Not true at all. This article is about 1 day too late. Sony and MS BOTH claimed that neither were pressured by 3rd party companies to develop DRM consoles. It was 100% the evil of idea of wicked satanic brain child known as Microsoft.

3rd parties can use online passes (even if sony themselves quit using it for their own 1st party games).

That's a fair enough deal. If they want.

ShawnCollier1936d ago

It's not like Sony hasn't been looking into it, they filed patents related to DRM locking before.

Granted they obviously won't say if they had this in mind now due to the Xbone debacle, but it's not like they never looked into it at all.

Donnieboi1936d ago

That's what I just said-_-

NihonjinChick1936d ago

They said the patent wasn't for PS4 back in February. I'm still curious to see what the patent for.

ziggurcat1936d ago

@ incrediblegamerchick:

Probably their 4K players.

MikeMyers1936d ago (Edited 1936d ago )

The article is about luring people to buy online where games come with DRM. When you buy games like Journey, Fez, or even The Walking Dead on the online stores that content is now locked to your account. Sony and Microsoft will be offering games day of release on their stores. Steam does this too. So what we are likely going to see are items and content exclusive on the digital store like we see with some disc games now such as pre-order or store exclusive content.

The best way to get consumers to buy online is to price it aggressively. That's why so many love Steam sales and Amazon sales. We don't see that too much yet on consoles yet. One of the major problems with game consoles are they have to compete with retail stores. There are also royalties involved which is why console games usually cost more.

We will continue to see a shift in content going digital. We're already seeing it on smaller games and indie titles. Those AAA games will be the last ones to go full digital. That is likely because they want to reach out to as many consumers as possible because costs are so high to create them. What we are going to see on some AAA games is always online games like Destiny. Once those titles become very successful there will be no stopping publishers forcing games online and when that happens disc based games will become a thing of the past.

YNWA961936d ago

Well said Mike, bubble for ya... Online is the way, and no choice about drm or ownership there, but its not an issue...

SilentNegotiator1936d ago (Edited 1936d ago )

Yeah, PATENT. As in, they can make people pay royalties on the idea.

Still playing up that angle, eh? I hate to break it to you, but no one expects to be able to share digital games. It isn't considered an issue one takes ISSUE with it.

"When you buy games like Journey, Fez, or even The Walking Dead"

Journey and Walking Dead can always be bought on disc.

SolidStoner1936d ago (Edited 1936d ago )

all the gamers want is to buy a good quality game CD for cheap price, then do with it whatever he wants... sell it, trade it, burn it or play it..

If games would cost 15 $ it would change the industry.. it would go massive like music or movies.. everyone would play games then, and know everything about them...

I dont need digital copies of games or movies... when I buy them I feel like I was robbed.. I pay the money.. but I dont get the product.. only a copy of it... its like buying a Picasso art for 1,000,000 created on a tint printer... and they say "but it looks the same"

but we all know its not the same.. just a cheap copy.. in digital world its cost is even less.. nothing... if you cant sell the thing you own.. you dont own it!!!! you dont even have it.. you are just borrowing it, and paying full price..

^^^^ gamers sayd NO to this!!!!! ^^^^
at least until next time..

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1936d ago
ShawnCollier1936d ago

(Doing another top-level reply because N4G doesn't allow deep enough nested comments.)

What I was referring to was patents similar to the disc-locking stuff the Xbone was originally going to use, not online pass-type DRM.

Razputin1936d ago

I'm not taking the sides of any console, but understand guys Sony was going to do something similar to Microsoft, were they were(or are) going to let 3rd party developers choose whether or not their games can be traded/shared in whatever form.

What needs to happen is if they want a completely digital realm, lower the prices of games by about half. Yes, this may not seem realistic to most of you, but if this was the case a lot more people will be in business.

If a publisher can push double or even triple the amount of copies of their games because they are priced cheaper than the $60 standard than we can all come out winning.

Mike I know you have high hopes for always online games like Destiny, but what the future and games similar to this -- F2P (Free To Play) hold is just super micro transaction.

It is rolling highly abundant on PCs already.

Warframe, Airmech, Gotham City Impostors, Planetside 2, and a ton more on just Steam alone.

If you see yes they are free, but the cost to get anything remotely good in the game either requires obscene amounts of playtime, or actual money.

I really don't want gaming to head this way, but if someone doesn't come up with a better solution, it will (and is) happen(ing).

The reason so many Indie titles are successful is because, yes, a lot of people do like them, but their price points are just too good to pass up.

Most people will justify spending $20 (Usually a lot less) for a Indie Humble Bundle, than $60 on a game they will more than likely play once, and/or trade it in.

But, again, we need to show these game companies that they are catering to people/consumers/customers/gam ers, and shouldn't be catering to their damn Share/Stockholders before us.

awi59511936d ago (Edited 1936d ago )

Thats a total lie. Why would money hungry EA announce they were dropping online passes huh? Because they knew the new consoles had DRM because they asked for it. Ill bet you 100 bucks that online passes come back now. Who wants part of that action ill bet anyone. Put your money where your mouth is.

mephman1937d ago

That would be true if the article was talking about developers pressuring Sony or Microsoft about their DRM policies.

However, it's more talking about how publishers/developers are starting to take things more into their own hands, especially with CliffyB stating that he expects publishers to start offering incentives for people to purchase digitally.

Software_Lover1936d ago

Most publishers are gonna try online only games or FTP games with microtransactions. Day one DLC. DLC that is already on the DISC. 15.00 for 2 maps instead of 3 (I have never bought any map pack for any game unless it came already with a collectors edition.)

The industry is gonna get smart with how they plan on getting your money. It's a catch 22.

ziggurcat1936d ago

No they won't. Devs were (as far as I know) happy that Ms reversed their decision. And it'll be hard to implement DRM when the console can be used entirely I offline.

Software_Lover1936d ago

Not really. Just make it where your games has to be played with a connection and there you go. Doesn't matter if it's online or not. Better yet, make it when you launch a game you have to sign in online, as do some XBLA and PSN games make you do now.

MikeyDucati11936d ago

So who is still pushing DRM then? If you're saying devs are not going to push it, then why is there a noticeable push to get DRM out there? Despite what happened with Xbox One? This is what is interesting and I'm glad this article pointed that out. There's still a buzz generating about DRM. And I'm not talking about the forum negative posting either. The industry wants DRM in your home and they are going to figure out a way to slip it in there.

Hydralysk1936d ago (Edited 1936d ago )

Well it's already happening, just look at Steam.

A thing I hear often is that Steam DRM is ok because they price it low, but that's not something I agree with. Steam gets away with it because it's cheap, and I like Steam, but I won't defend their DRM just because it isn't as terrible as some of the other schemes.

Steam ties the games to your account, and if your account is banned you lose access to your library. I don't care how much of a jackass the person is being, denying access to the game library they rightfully paid for is going too far. I'm not comfortable paying for permission to play a game instead of the actual game.

This isn't something unique to the games industry either, we are still struggling to define digital ownership in the movie and music industry as well. A US court ruled recently that you can't resell any music in your iTunes library, even though it's perfectly legal to resell that same music on a CD.

The point of this spiel is that, as good as Steam is compared to it's competition, it's DRM policies still aren't something positive or something we should view as acceptable. Unless I can actually feel that I'm buying a game and not a revocable license, I'll stick to physical media or sites like GoG if at all possible.

MikeyDucati11936d ago

That's a good response. Enjoyed reading it, thanks.

Sanrin1936d ago

These days it's super cool to be a good guy developer, and being cool means selling more games. I'm sure this won't be the last we see of DRM, but for now I think we're safe.

Show all comments (29)