Top
120°

Debate On DRM In Games: Necessary Or Evil?

Is DRM a necessity or the bane of the PC gaming industry? This debate attempts to give both sides of the argument a defense. The entire thing was conducted in Instant Message, and is thus posted in that form.

Read Full Story >>
slapstic.com
The story is too old to be commented.
cheese3697d ago

World of Goo is a tragic tale, and proves that it is necessary.

MountainMaverick3697d ago

WoG also proves that no matter how good a game is, and no matter how small, independent, and creative the creators are, pirates will pirate things. They aren't doing it to "stick it to the man." They do it because it's easy and they're douchebags. I'd like to see someone argue against that intelligently.

Kriller3697d ago

Intelligently? Good luck with that here.

FantasyStar3697d ago (Edited 3697d ago )

Easy. You have 3 groups.

1. Pirates that will do it regardless of the price
2. Pirates that sometimes buys the product afterwards
3. Pirates that always buy products they pirate afterwards.

In WoG's case, I just didn't see the appeal of it or the love, and I'm sure many others share my sentiment. I'm not saying Piracy is suddenly good, I'm just trying to rationalize the high-rate of piracy for WoG. Hell I never even heard of that game until I saw it on N4G. The claimed 80% piracy for WoG is probably 80 people out of the 100 that's playing WoG, not too much. Perhaps WoG had potential, but I surely didn't see it. And no, I didn't download it either.

If there's no one to actually upload the game onto the tubes with no conventional method of playback, then piracy stops right there. That's why PS3 isn't under piracy-siege. I'd say about the majority of pirates are no-nothing cheats that'd probably get banned easier if you take off the safety stickers. The more difficult it is to pirate "said" game, the less the piracy rate is because you'll weed out the moochers.

The only time I consider piracy as "sticking it to the man" is EA. EA is the bane of all things good in video games. Even if EA published a good game (Mirror's Edge, Dead Space, Army of Two), you can bet that EA will always find a way to **** that all up with add-ons that should be in-game, short game-content for the sake of milking the DLC cow dry, and in-game ****ing ads! Skate's probably the worst offender.

JeanPool3697d ago

LoL, JeanPool thinks you likes the homoeroticism of Army of Two ;), hot bro action, no? But DRM is teh pointless attempt at stopping pirates, jeanpool thinks they will all succeed anyway: Spore.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3697d ago
ZomgBox3697d ago

Whutever I'll play on my ZOMGBox and won't worrie bout this.

tinydancer3697d ago

Yeah, it's okay if an indie developer goes under as long as they haven't made a game for your console.

Moron.

tinydancer3697d ago

Holy crap. This is gonna start an EPIC flame war. I think Matthew kinda got won over to Ryan's side at least a little bit at the end there.

JeanPool3697d ago

JeanPool thinks the only thing that's epic about this story is his comment. BLARGHH! DRM for the loose.

furyswrath3697d ago

Its a double edge sword.. Its good at the same time its evil. If Companies would allow people to make "back up" copies of games / cds / DVD etc and still have some type of DRM i dont think people would gripe as much. But I know im guilty of scratching a DVD movie or game and having to look or borrow a copy so I can crack it and make my own copy, Even though i Legally purchased the item.

So its kinda a Yes and No thing with me.. I Say no DRM till they can allow both.

Proxy3697d ago (Edited 3697d ago )

There is no arguing that companies have the right to include DRM in their games.

For myself, as a customer, I simply draw the lines. Usually this is that if a game requires online activation, and especially limited installs then I pass on it.

If the game companies have to include invasive DRM, I will not buy. They will go under, and I will find other things to spend my money on. Other games, or other things in life.

If EA and Ubisoft go under, all I have to play is things like this,
http://www.blackmesasource....
that are made by indi groups.

JeanPool3697d ago

JeanPool thinks big publishers don't need to rely on the PC market, they can exist without it. If DRM fails so teh PC market, but JeanPool doesn't care. Consolez ftw.

Proxy3697d ago

JeanPool thinks big publishers don't need to rely on the PC market, they can exist without it. If DRM fails so teh PC market, but JeanPool doesn't care. Consolez ftw.

Sure, the big companies can exist without supporting the PC, but I don't play their games on PC anyways, so why would I care?

If the PC market does fail, there will still be millions of players on indie and niche games.

The market might fail, but the gaming will not.

baum3697d ago

Draconian DRM is not the solution, Spore shows that draconian DRM angers consumers. Draconian DRM pretty much defeats its own point as shown by evidence, at least in current times. There are other ways to eliminate draconian DRM and prevent piracy. Here are two examples of "hidden" DRM:

1. Make games playable anywhere with an online account. While that's still DRM, it doesn't cripple the amount of consoles or pcs you can play the game at. You can play the game anytime anywhere, just with your own account.

2. Use Blu-ray disc. As long as Blu-ray is expensive, there's no reason to opt for piracy. The only thing that would hurt the publisher is used game sales, which is why option 1 is a must.

IMHO, as soon as game streaming becomes the norm, or at least linking games with accounts, the problem with piracy and used game sales will be eliminated. Also, it won't be about how many times you can download a game or install it, it'll be on which accounts you can use it. If developers manage to make games cheaper because of that, or let users buy the rights to play the game on more than one account for a better price, then it'll be win-win for everyone.

Show all comments (19)