Continuously online or no game (DRM)

[Jay]

No they're employees with families and mortgages. It's not the "faceless corporation head-honchos" that get laid off when profit targets aren't met, it's the engineers on the ground who get thrown on the rubbish heap and have to scrabble to prevent the bank seizing their house.

But you're right, screw them right? I mean they only made the damn things in the first place. Your entertainment is more important than their livelihoods after all.

That's not really how corporations work though is it. Or are you suggesting that when corporation X's profits increase from ?5 million to ?10 million in a year, everyone suddenly gets twice the pay? Corporations expect to increase their profits every year for the sake of earning more money and not so they can feed their poor, struggling employees. Corporations are usually driven by greed, not some noble need to feed their staff.

Yes, I work for a software company so I can speak from experience.

[averybluemonkey]

Most companies have bonus schemes based on profits, or share schemes.

My point was that if targets aren't met employees get laid off to keep the share price up. That his self righteous attitude ignored the realities of the world and that he ignores the impact of piracy on developers and their lives.

Yes, I work for a software company in profit and and yet am being made redundant anyway so I can also speak from experience.

[Jay]

And forcing users to play online - leaving a sour taste in the mouths of customers, and potentially causing users to head down the piracy route - would save jobs like yours, I suppose? I'm sorry, I don't buy that. I'm sorry to hear of your plight, but I don't agree with online DRM as a way of ensuring software companies retain their staff.

[Darwock]

I'm 100% behind Sketcz here, I can see why averybluemonkey is defending it but there are surely far better ways for these companies to protect their property.

[Flabio]

As I said, in the case of XBLIG it's got bugger all to do with piracy.

[Sketcz]

Thanks for explanation on XBLIG - it will no longer enter my thoughts when discussing this topic.

The fact remains that these are the type of games which would not have been released at all if there were no DRM or use management in place.

But you're right, screw them right? I mean they only made the damn things in the first place. Your entertainment is more important than their livelihoods after all.

I'm calling shenanigans on the utter nonsense both of you posted.

How many games are on PSN? Of those, only Final Fight and BC2, both by Capcom, use this bull**** DRM. How many PC games are there? I only know of Command & Conquer 4. Maybe there are a few others, but the majority of games on PC and PSN do not use it, and do not need to use it to 1) be made in the first place, and 2) turn a profit.

What about the livlihoods of those who made The Last Guy, or Braid, or Puzzle Fighter, Super rub a dub, or I don't know... Pretty much every other game ever online. The Final Fight DRM was in place before the PS3 was cracked. If they did it because of game sharing, then reduce downloads to one per account, not five.


Anyone who says this DRM is essential for games to get made and be profitable is an idiot.

Games have and are being made without it, and are profitable, and there are other better anti-piracy methods.This anti-piracy method actually stops me from playing the game, and I have no intention of ever pirating it. That is my whole argument. By stopping piracy in this manner they have stopped me as a legitimate consumer from buying the product.


The whole point of this topic is that we're seeing the first of the plague rats in London, and if we as consumer don't band together and stomp this **** dead, it will grow, and it will spread, and eventually it will be out of control. As a journalist I want to scream about this from every tall building I can find - we need damage control before these ****ers run away with themselves and ruin the entire industry.

Not everyone has continuous access to the net!

[Family Fry]

All I can say is apparently Capcom have done this to prevent game/profile sharing of the title happening. It was rumoured a while back Capcom saw (lets say 12,000) sales but alas the online leaderboard was well over (lets say 40,000) what was bought, meaning people had shared the game.

[Sketcz]

Then allow only one download instead of five - other games did this without forceful DRM.

[averybluemonkey]

And forcing users to play online - leaving a sour taste in the mouths of customers, and potentially causing users to head down the piracy route - would save jobs like yours, I suppose? I'm sorry, I don't buy that. I'm sorry to hear of your plight, but I don't agree with online DRM as a way of ensuring software companies retain their staff.

You've kind of taken this out of context here. My personal example was nothing to do with piracy but a response to your incorrect assertion that a company's profits has no effect on staffing levels.

Piracy causes losses and reduces profits which has a direct and undisputable impact on staffing levels.

Sketz making a comparison to something like Braid is ridiculous as a one man band operation is completely different to maintaining a company and employing staff. The simple fact is that over the years how many game studios actually last? A lot go under. Job security is also far less than in other comparable fields.

I'm not saying this is all down to piracy but you can't deny that having people steal your software doesn't exactly help matters. If people didn't pirate software DRM wouldn't be required in the first place. And Sketz there's been quite a few PC games in recent years doing this. Maybe this implementation isn't the best but I would direct my anger at the pirates not the developers.

On a personal level I prefer this solution to the one you propose of limiting the downloads to just 1. Otherwise I would have to rebut all my games everytime my machine breaks.

[Jay]

Sorry, but where did I assert that company profits have no effect on staffing levels? Of course companies get rid of staff if they see it as beneficial to the financial wellbeing of the company.

I'm talking about corporation *motives*. A typical company seeks only to make more and more profit. They're not interested in feeding and clothing their staff and ensuring they can pay their bills. So to cite the financial needs of company staff as a reason for DRM is a bit silly tbh.

[Brad]

Hey Scetcz, just don't buy it mate. There's a ton of games out there to play that don't do this. I love applying principals to my game purchases. I wouldn't buy a game that required me to be online to play (online-only games excluded obviously)*. I agree with you, I think this practice of Capcom's is stupid.


*Watch me rant uncontrollably if they do this to a game that I do like of course ;-)

[averybluemonkey]

I'm talking about corporation *motives*. A typical company seeks only to make more and more profit. They're not interested in feeding and clothing their staff and ensuring they can pay their bills. So to cite the financial needs of company staff as a reason for DRM is a bit silly tbh.

And I was talking about *effects* not motives, your post was in response to mine not the other way around. Most companies recognise that to retain skilled staff they have to take care of them anyway. If you don't offer attractive remuneration then you won't get high quality staff, profits pay for staff that drive profits. So the two motives are mutually entwined.

[monel]

I support this thread, how can these companies assume every customer is able to be online at all times?

If you sell me the game, let me play it when I want, without any conditions or restrictions.

[rmoxon]

I think alot of people do have their console online all the time these days anyway, but it is ridiculous that you wont be able to play somthing unless you are online.

This isnt somthing that will ever happen on the 360 at least (besides the indie games) due to the fact that you can only play games on one console anyway unless youre logged into your account while you play them.

I dont understand why the PS3 dosent work the same really.

[Jay]

I think alot of people do have their console online all the time these days anyway, but it is ridiculous that you wont be able to play somthing unless you are online.

This isnt somthing that will ever happen on the 360 at least due to the fact that you can only play games on one console anyway unless youre logged into your account while you play them.

I dont understand why the PS3 dosent work the same really.

Not actually true.

Buy XBLA game on machine A logged in as user X.

Download game onto machine B.

Move profile of user X onto machine B.

Log onto machine B as user X - play XBLA game.

Log into machine A as anyone - play XBLA game.

You can have the same game running on machines A and B simultaneously.