A permanent internet connection even in single player mode. I’ve just got back from Germany where the internet was 5.50E a day in the hotel. Yup that kind of DRM will really encourage me to lay down $50 over a pirate copy I could play anywhere. :rolleyes:
Sure it affects only a small percentage of their customers but hey that another few more percent who’ll consider piracy over purchasing.
[QUOTE=Ryan;209400]I don’t like third party programs to run a game I bought 
What’s wrong with how ET:QW did it?[/QUOTE]Steam is a third party program to run games. Your comment doesn’t make any sense. 
ETQW’s system only works for a MP only game. BC2 has got a storymode as well.
[QUOTE=darthmob;209407]Steam is a third party program to run games. Your comment doesn’t make any sense.
ETQW’s system only works for a MP only game. BC2 has got a storymode as well.[/QUOTE]
? That’s what I said. I don’t like third party programs to run a bought game, thus I don’t like Steam…
And I thought we were discussing Brink, not BC2 
You are right, nobody is forcing me to have steam. But somebody is forcing me to have some piece of crap intrusive, software from Sony that invades my privacy.
Did Sony pay me anything so that they can gather information about when I play, where i play from and and what games I play? NO
is this game free of charge? NO
then why should I put up with this crap?
Can someone from SD or Bethesda answer what type of DRM will Brink have? You’ll save me alot of wasted time on this forum because no matter how relaxed, user friedly securom may be I will not have it installed on my machine.
Isn’t this normally decided by publisher? Why not go ask Bethesda instead of cluttering up this forum.
All i can say is do not go down the dark path that Unisoft has just annonced with there new system.
Something similar to how ETQW worked would be good.
Sadly that only works for multiplayer games. Singleplayer games shouldn’t require net connection to play and thus requires some protection. I wouldn’t say DRM is useful, or even close to it, but it might hold off some non-torrent users.
I think the point is whether the DRM you implement is going to actually make those users buy the game. Which is doubt is the case, I’d be surprised if even a single digit percentage of those “pirates” would buy a game if DRM was actually 100% effective. Then you have to consider the negative impact of the DRM on your legitimate customer base and how that affects sales.
I’m also interested in how companies such as Ubisoft aim to tackle console piracy. If they’re “just protecting their interests” I’m stunned at how they’re letting these ‘crack once, pirate forever’ consoles become the mainstream pirating platforms of choice without even a peep.
IMO best DRM.
[ul]
[li]Fair price - Don’t rape your customer base. Be prepared to discount for those who can’t afford full price.
[/li][li]Quality product - If a product is buggy and poorly designed. Fix it, don’t release it. Have some pride in your work and don’t push sh*t onto your customers.
[/li][li]Good support - Support the product and engage the community. Breed loyalty and trust.
[/li][/ul]
Do these things and you don’t need any more DRM in my book. Fail to do them and all the DRM and marketing in the world won’t get me to buy the game.
Yea, but your copy could be authenticated one time when installing. Otherwise it would abort the install?
Or is that like the easiest way to crack?
I used to think this was the case, but these days copyright infringement wins because it’s … easier and more convenient. Getting a credit card or going to a store is the hard way ! Sales based on digital download prove time and again that you can make good money on selling games if you make it as fuss free as possible. I’d say copying a CD, even without DRM, is harder than just clicking on a link provided by a friend. I’m a CS graduate with a different view of complexity, so it took me a while to understand them. Now imagine one of those ‘simple users’ has a trouble with online activation, DRM, authentication. Suddenly just using a cracked game looks a lot simpler by comparison ! Say what you like about crackers, but they never make the installation process harder.
“Easier and more convenient” is very important because owning a computer are becoming less and less of a geek thing (Geek in this context being someone who’s good at problem solving). Increasingly, computers are being used and owned by people who openly declare they hate computers. I think a company from Redmond is to blame, but I digress. For a lot of these people ‘simple’ is not simple enough. It has to be braindead.
No mandatory Steam, for the love of Strogg!
I just got pissed by AVP3 having that so I won’t buy it though i REALLY would have liked to (it justs reminds me of ETQW…).
You SD guys did it perfect with ETQW: CD-Key, and the rest just ****ing works without issues.
I understand the reasons behind and have no problem with Steam req, disk check, CD key, and most other DRM that doesn’t infrequently mess with peoples’ computers when it breaks, allows root kits or impose install limits…
Just to register my less extreme opinion.
its not Steam itself feats, but cause side effect of online services, provided by it.
i hope SD/ZM not goo too far in opressing customers, such as forced activations[and limiting numerb of it(pain 4 hw entusiasts, frquntly reinstalling OS’es and etc)], persistent online connection requirements[like anounced by EA shitheads and even by[usually reasonable guys]Ubisoft], and without OS/invasive 0-ring[kernel-mode]drivers, i hope.
[quote=hozz;210351]No mandatory Steam, for the love of Strogg!
I just got pissed by AVP3 having that so I won’t buy it though i REALLY would have liked to (it justs reminds me of ETQW…).
You SD guys did it perfect with ETQW: CD-Key, and the rest just ****ing works without issues.[/quote]
Given what the Steam/Steamworks platform brings to the game what is the exact aversion to it? I mean if they hid it all behind an in-game gui would you feel better about it?
My opinion is that the little you give up with Steam you gain back many times over with features of the platform. Although Valve could get a move on and make it even better.
[QUOTE=SockDog;210706]
My opinion is that the little you give up with Steam you gain back many times over with features of the platform. Although Valve could get a move on and make it even better.[/QUOTE]
my opinion is, Steam team need more production culture and more care about stuff, before release/update it.
because garbage inside it, mean garbage in heads.
planing, timeline, strict release politics and etc and etc is boring but actually eventual for such service.
not current “eat this !!” thows to online crowd.
p.s.
no offense.
p.p.s.
silencing/whiting out something about Brink, let me suspect, that ZM went by same way, which go US/EA and etc. ie persistent uplink goes REQUIRED for game[even …“Offline”(strongly with quotes from now :/)mode].
I disagree (i think). The push updates of Steam and the games on it is a great function. Consolidating updates into larger and more interspersed updates is poor customer service if you ask me. Back when download speeds were slow and the internet less common it made all the sense in the world, now it makes more sense to put individual bug fixes out as soon as they’re done.
As far as the platform goes. I see Steam as pretty stable and functional. They seem on top of that part of the platform. What I would like to see more of is expanding features that will be of use to gamers, integration with social APIs such as facebook/twitter, irc perhaps (are group chats persistent?), maybe even some kind of hosting for screenshots/videos etc.
MMm little off topic on the DRM thing. I’ll just say that DRM that comes with positive features is preferable to DRM that just gets in your way without a single benefit to the end customer. It’s like being strip searched on the way into and out of a store. At least the Steam version would have a suitably hot person to strip you down and maybe give you a massage, happy ending and commemorative DVD as part of the process. Okay I’ll stop right there I think.
If Steam weren’t so bloody expensive for new releases I’d buy ALL my games from them! You can’t beat their sales, though.
I find disc checks faintly annoying because I have a noisy drive, but I’m not otherwise overly bothered by it.
Its the publisher that sets the Steam price unfortunately, not Steam itself. The reason they jack the Steam price up and sometimes release 3 days later is at the request of big shops like Walmart. If Walmart don’t get the best share of the action then they won’t sell the game at all which just hurts everyone else. Nothing to be done about it.
I think Brink would actually sell better if the singleplayer wasn’t protected. All those pirates might just buy it anyway because they’re aching to show off their character online.
Uncomfortable having all my games auth through one central service. Don’t really care about the Steam functions enough, and haven’t seen any games which interested me enough to use it despite my dislike. The day I start buying games on Steam is the day that Activision buy them. It’s better for everyone if I don’t, honest.
Also, annoying how every time I mention I don’t like Steam much a bunch of rabid people come out and scream OMG U HATER OPEN UR MIND like Homeopaths who’ve just been asked whether they really meant to say that water cures AIDS or something, though obviously that’s not Steam’s fault.
Given that DRM only works (if it does at all) during the first week or two of release, how about publishers throw on some typically terrible DRM for that first fortnight, then strip it all off and go DRM free (or DRM transparent-to-the-actual-customer at least) after then?
IE, do exactly what they do now, except strip the DRM off much sooner so it happens when people are still interested in their game and not six months later?