A perspective on DRM

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

Why don't you think it's the pirates' fault that the customer services have to treat their customers like criminals?

I don't care about what publishers do with regards to their relationship and treatment of pirates. That's really got nothing to do with me. I'm interested in my relationship as a paying customer with the publisher who took my money. If the customer is going to be shipped a buggy product and treated like a pirate, then what actual difference is there between buying and pirating a product? Or plain old getting disillusioned with gaming as a hobby at all?

The publishers have gone wrong by ensuring that the experience of the paying customer is worse in some cases than those that pirate the game. Instead of making it more desirable to buy the game, it becomes more desirable to pirate it.

It's been proved time and time again, that if you do not make your product what the customers want to buy, then they don't buy it from you, or even give up being part of your market at all.

This is just like the anti-theft devices in those retail stores. If there's no thieves, there is no need for them to install those devices.

There are lots of stores that don't use the devices. Imagine if a store insisted on frisking you in and out of the store - I'm pretty sure not many people would want to go there, yet the software industry sells you something whilst trying to take away all your ownership rights. It's no wonder people don't respond well to that at all, or the lame excuse that it's because of everyone else that doesn't buy their product even though you did the right thing and gave them your cash.

Basically, if you pay up, you get treated like crap - it's no wonder that people don't find that appealing as a customer experience.

 

[pcchen]

Unless they have good data to show that they're losing a significant portion of the profits from the sales of the game through customer service to pirates, they have no cause whatsoever to treat all persons seeking customer service as criminals.

I don't know about games, but if they have gross margin at the level like us, then customer service is a significant portion of the cost.

 

[pcchen]

I don't care about what publishers do with regards to their relationship and treatment of pirates. That's really got nothing to do with me. I'm interested in my relationship as a paying customer with the publisher who took my money. If the customer is going to be shipped a buggy product and treated like a pirate, then what actual difference is there between buying and pirating a product? Or plain old getting disillusioned with gaming as a hobby at all?

Simple. If it's that bad, stop buying things from that vendor. I constantly hearing people saying "something isn't worth the money, so I pirate it." Why pirate it if it's not worthy at all? It's all bogus reasoning.

There are lots of stores that don't use the devices. Imagine if a store insisted on frisking you in and out of the store - I'm pretty sure not many people would want to go there, yet the software industry sells you something whilst trying to take away all your ownership rights. It's no wonder people don't respond well to that at all, or the lame excuse that it's because of everyone else that doesn't buy their product even though you did the right thing and gave them your cash.

Yeah, people won't go to that store, but they'll sneak from a back door, like those software pirates do?

Actually, think about it this way: supposed that you are a small game developer who comes up a brilliant idea and make a little game, then a large company steals your idea and make their own version, and make it available to everyone, freely! How would you think about it?

Till now, many people are saying DRM is bad, treating customers like criminal is bad, etc. But I don't see any suggestions for improving the situation. It's easy to say "just remove all DRM." But how to make profit without DRM? Maybe increasing the price is the answer, but is it? Or is it good for everyone?

Current PC gaming situation actually makes me quite sad. Many publishers are openly going to console-only policy or delaying PC version just to make sure piracy won't hurt them that much. It's not just one publisher, but many publishers. Yet many people are still saying it's just an illusion, pirates are not a problems, etc. I really don't know who is under an illusion.

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

Simple. If it's that bad, stop buying things from that vendor. I constantly hearing people saying "something isn't worth the money, so I pirate it." Why pirate it if it's not worthy at all? It's all bogus reasoning.

I did, and all I get is publishers and devs in the press basically accusing me of being a pirate because their game didn't sell well. In fact I just decided to spend my "gaming money" on other hobbies.

Instead of publishers and devs trying to find constructive things to improve their situation, they simply go further into more destructive methods that simply drive people like myself further away from games. I simply buy a lot less than I used to because I don't trust the devs, and all the DRM hassles means that I do my research and a game has to be really special for me to put down my cash for it. If it's not, I just won't bother.

Actually, think about it this way: supposed that you are a small game developer who comes up a brilliant idea and make a little game, then a large company steals your idea and make their own version, and make it available to everyone, freely! How would you think about it?

Suppose you are a customer, and you buy a game, but it doesn't work because of DRM. The publisher directs you to Securom for help, Securom directs you to the publisher, and the store won't take the game back as it's been opened. How would you feel about that publisher basically stealing your money and not giving you a working product, or any kind of fix or refund? And when you try and sell it on, you find you can't as your game has been DRM locked to your PC only. That's enough hassle to turn you off gaming altogether, let alone that particular publisher's products.

Current PC gaming situation actually makes me quite sad. Many publishers are openly going to console-only policy or delaying PC version just to make sure piracy won't hurt them that much. It's not just one publisher, but many publishers. Yet many people are still saying it's just an illusion, pirates are not a problems, etc. I really don't know who is under an illusion.

Yet you look at the figures, and the PC makes as much money as any one of the consoles, and you get the likes of EA saying that a pirated game is not a lost sale. Really, devs are just chasing the cash by going after consoles right now, and using piracy as an excuse when their sub-standard games don't do well.

You might as well blame WoW for sucking 10 million customers out of the potential audience for anything that gets released in a given month - but I'm pretty sure Blizzard isn't complaining.

 

[pcchen]

I did, and all I get is publishers and devs in the press basically accusing me of being a pirate because their game didn't sell well. In fact I just decided to spend my "gaming money" on other hobbies.

I don't think anyone is accusing you personally.

Suppose you are a customer, and you buy a game, but it doesn't work because of DRM. The publisher directs you to Securom for help, Securom directs you to the publisher, and the store won't take the game back as it's been opened. How would you feel about that publisher basically stealing your money and not giving you a working product, or any kind of fix or refund? And when you try and sell it on, you find you can't as your game has been DRM locked to your PC only. That's enough hassle to turn you off gaming alltogether, let alone that particular publisher's products.

You may have a case if you can prove that the publishers are intentionally stealing your money so they put the DRM in. The problem here is not DRM, but the fact that they refuse to refund for return a product. This is a problem that should be fixed, but it's not really about DRM. Actually, the same thing can happen to a non-DRM-ed game.

Yet you look at the figures, and the PC makes as much money as any one of the consoles, and you get the likes of EA saying that a pirated game is not a lost sale. Really, devs are just chasing the cash by going after consoles right now, and using piracy as an excuse when their sub-standard games don't do well.

Maybe. However, when a game is selling on both console and PC, and PC version is not doing well, it looks like they have a case that piracy is at least part of the reason why their games are not doing well.

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

I don't think anyone is accusing you personally.

Yes they are. I am the exact sort of person who "should" be buying their games, but isn't. The publishers accusation is that I am pirating. My response is that I'm spending my money elsewhere because their products have become less attractive to me.

You may have a case if you can prove that the publishers are intentionally stealing your money so they put the DRM in. The problem here is not DRM, but the fact that they refuse to refund for return a product. This is a problem that should be fixed, but it's not really about DRM. Actually, the same thing can happen to a non-DRM-ed game.

If I'm being impacted by it, as a customer I don't really care if it's intentional or not. I just care that I've paid money and received a poor product and a poor service after the fact.

Maybe. However, when a game is selling on both console and PC, and PC version is not doing well, it looks like they have a case that piracy is at least part of the reason why their games are not doing well.

Yet EA says that's not the case, and there are no credible figures for it. IMO, there are always other reasons to look at. We've previously discussed the issues surrounding the dev's complaints of poor sales of Crysis and UT3, yet there are plenty of reasons other than piracy as to why these games didn't sell. I've previously discussed why I am in the perfect demographic for buying UT3, and the many reasons that for the first time in 10 years I didn't buy the new UT game, and none of them are to do with piracy. But all Epic can do is whine about piracy instead of looking at the many other reasons raised by myself any many others. Instead Epic would prefer to simply ban people off their forums and point the finger at others instead of the poor job they did for PC players.

What a shock - poorly received game doesn't sell well.

 

[KimB]

I don't know about games, but if they have gross margin at the level like us, then customer service is a significant portion of the cost.

Well, I think we'd need to see some actual numbers. But given that most companies seem to make it extremely challenging for anybody to reach customer support for their games, I rather suspect it's a non-issue.

As for the number of people who pirate games contacting customer support, I honestly wonder where they're getting the idea that a large portion are pirates. The last time I contacted customer support, for instance, was with The Witcher when I was requesting a new CD key (as mine was left back in the US, with nobody around to find it). Now, I certainly could have been a pirate for that game, but in this case I was not. But as far as the company was concerned, I very well could have been a pirate. Did they think I was one?

I know that personally, when it comes to software I have pirated, I've been extremely reticent to contact the company in any way, shape, or form. I don't know what they could have done, but if I was guilty, I sure as hell wasn't going to let them know it. I may have pursued self-help for the game in question to fix any issues I may have had (e.g. forums, FAQ's), but I sure as hell never contacted support on any such software. So it just strikes me as unlikely that such a large percentage of these companies' support time would be taken up by pirates, and if they're really worried about it, they should just require registration to get personalized support.

 

[pcchen]

I know that personally, when it comes to software I have pirated, I've been extremely reticent to contact the company in any way, shape, or form. I don't know what they could have done, but if I was guilty, I sure as hell wasn't going to let them know it. I may have pursued self-help for the game in question to fix any issues I may have had (e.g. forums, FAQ's), but I sure as hell never contacted support on any such software. So it just strikes me as unlikely that such a large percentage of these companies' support time would be taken up by pirates, and if they're really worried about it, they should just require registration to get personalized support.

It's quite possible that one who contacted the customer service is not necessarily the one who pirated it.

 

[pcchen]

If I'm being impacted by it, as a customer I don't really care if it's intentional or not. I just care that I've paid money and received a poor product and a poor service after the fact.

The point is, it's not related to DRM. For example, it's quite possible that a non-DRM-ed game which has compatibility problem can't be returned at all.

Yes, a pirated copy does not equal to a lost sale. Not everyone who downloaded a game from some pirate site are going to buy it anyway. Unfortunately, a significant portion of pirated copies are lost sales. It's still common to heard people saying "why buy it when you can download it for free?"

As of piracy being used as an excuse... well, maybe. However, piracy is still a problem. Actually, it even has negative impact on the quality of softwares. For example, some of our projects was stalled because they were pirated too much, so we decided to simply keep them at current status and did not improve them further, because we don't anticipate much more new sales from them.

 

[KimB]

It's still common to heard people saying "why buy it when you can download it for free?"

This has been answered in this thread, though. You simply give the customer value that the pirates don't have, and you definitely do not make the game a bigger hassle/nuisance for the customer than for the pirate.

There's also the point of focusing programs and services in directions where people are less likely to pirate. This happens naturally: as you mentioned, you stopped development on some projects because you didn't anticipate many additional sales. Clearly you didn't just stop working entirely, but worked in areas where you did anticipate new sales. What you shouldn't do, however, is treat your paying customers like criminals, because then they may just think, "Well, hey, if I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't, I'm just going to go the route that costs me less money."

 

[pcchen]

This has been answered in this thread, though. You simply give the customer value that the pirates don't have, and you definitely do not make the game a bigger hassle/nuisance for the customer than for the pirate.

This was quite possible in older days. In old times, games come with nice manual, maps, and other nice things. Unfortunately, not every game can go this route: some games just don't need any manual. Patches and new materials couldn't cut it either because they can be pirated too. In an age of digital downloads, it's even harder to differentiate from pirated copies. Customer service is actually one of them which you can make a bit more value, unfortunately that would mean that they have to be sure that they are serving the real customers rather than pirates.

There's also the point of focusing programs and services in directions where people are less likely to pirate. This happens naturally: as you mentioned, you stopped development on some projects because you didn't anticipate many additional sales. Clearly you didn't just stop working entirely, but worked in areas where you did anticipate new sales. What you shouldn't do, however, is treat your paying customers like criminals, because then they may just think, "Well, hey, if I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't, I'm just going to go the route that costs me less money."

This works for us (at least partially) because now we only work with OEMs we trusted and we make most of our applications tied to hardwares. However, this does not work for games, at least, for offline games. Of course, this also drives some game companies to online game market. For example, almost all game companies in Taiwan who actually develop their own games are doing online games, so they don't have to worry about piracy problems. There are private servers issue, but in most cases private servers can be bring down through legal means.

 

[pcchen]

I just received the Stardock's 2008 Customer Report. It mainly talks about its new platform "Impulse," which is like Steam. It has a page about Stardock's policy on DRM. It also contains a revised "The Gamers Bill of Rights" which is more specific, but still under discussion. Basically it's mostly inline with my own opinion and I'm happy to see this issue being discussed between publishers and game developers.

 

[KimB]

This was quite possible in older days. In old times, games come with nice manual, maps, and other nice things. Unfortunately, not every game can go this route: some games just don't need any manual. Patches and new materials couldn't cut it either because they can be pirated too. In an age of digital downloads, it's even harder to differentiate from pirated copies. Customer service is actually one of them which you can make a bit more value, unfortunately that would mean that they have to be sure that they are serving the real customers rather than pirates.

Online services are one way that many developers have added value to paying customers, while making things more difficult for the pirates. Things like integrated patch downloading add value. And as I've been saying, all they need to do for customer service is request registration. An easy way to do this would be to have customer service portals accessed through the Internet, where they require registration to access most service (registration service itself would, obviously, have to be open to all users).

This works for us (at least partially) because now we only work with OEMs we trusted and we make most of our applications tied to hardwares. However, this does not work for games, at least, for offline games. Of course, this also drives some game companies to online game market. For example, almost all game companies in Taiwan who actually develop their own games are doing online games, so they don't have to worry about piracy problems. There are private servers issue, but in most cases private servers can be bring down through legal means.

Right, and I don't see a problem with this. If it's difficult to get gamers to pay for offline games, then stop making offline games. But things haven't gotten so bad here in the US, and developers sure as hell shouldn't treat their customers like criminals so that they do. If they're treated like criminals, after all, they're more likely to act like criminals.

 

[KimB]

It mainly talks about its new platform "Impulse," which is like Steam.

I find this comparison kind of funny. Impulse is the new version of Stardock Central, a piece of software which was "like Steam" before Steam was even released.

 

[pcchen]

And as I've been saying, all they need to do for customer service is request registration. An easy way to do this would be to have customer service portals accessed through the Internet, where they require registration to access most service (registration service itself would, obviously, have to be open to all users).

Registration for service is fine, but in many cases it's not enough. For example, you don't really want to force your user to register when they install the game (most people don't want to do that anyway). But the problem is, when they actually need servicing, they probably don't have enough information for registering. For example, they may have lost their serial number. Of course, one can put a message in the installer to remind the users that if they don't register now they may have difficulties later when they need customer service.

Customer service over a phone is a even tougher problem. But fortunately it seems that less people are likely to use phone for customer service these days.

 

[KimB]

Registration for service is fine, but in many cases it's not enough. For example, you don't really want to force your user to register when they install the game (most people don't want to do that anyway). But the problem is, when they actually need servicing, they probably don't have enough information for registering. For example, they may have lost their serial number. Of course, one can put a message in the installer to remind the users that if they don't register now they may have difficulties later when they need customer service.

Yes, it's not perfect. But it should thin the ranks without significantly impacting paying customers.

Customer service over a phone is a even tougher problem. But fortunately it seems that less people are likely to use phone for customer service these days.

Well, I think that's largely a function of a history of really shitty service over the phone. Plus, no waiting on hold when nabbing service online!

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

I just received the Stardock's 2008 Customer Report. It mainly talks about its new platform "Impulse," which is like Steam. It has a page about Stardock's policy on DRM. It also contains a revised "The Gamers Bill of Rights" which is more specific, but still under discussion. Basically it's mostly inline with my own opinion and I'm happy to see this issue being discussed between publishers and game developers.

From the report:

What would make you purchase more software in general (not just Stardock software)?
38% LOWER prices
30% better quality at the initial release
17% less copy protection/DRM
5% better support

Is anyone else reading that as "stop ripping us off with high prices, buggy releases and DRM"?

 

[Mintmaster]

That seems unlikely. There's plenty of ex students even now who now pay for such things who didn't before and I hardly think putting DRM on something is going to significantly alter the population's moral balance. Those who think it's wrong don't need DRM to tell them that and those who don't (probably due to bad parenting), aren't likely going to change their mind due to something 'the authorities' tell them.

I think you missed the point I was making.

The student was just an example of someone that you might excuse for pirating. Someone like that, according to the dev in Chalnoth's link, should simply be ignored from the target market of your game. If this is acceptable, then someone else thinks its okay to pirate because he's a little strapped for cash. Eventually piracy just becomes acceptable, and payment for all games or albums effectively becomes voluntary.

I wasn't really addressing DRM in any way. I'm just saying that you do need to enforce copyright laws in some way and make sure it doesn't become acceptable. You can't just ignore piracy and think that the free market will make them change ways.

 

[Bambers]

I did get your point, I just don't see how the enforcement of copyright laws or not is really going to significantly swing the moral balance here. It certainly hasn't had more than a minor impact on music piracy anyway.

Maybe. However, when a game is selling on both console and PC, and PC version is not doing well, it looks like they have a case that piracy is at least part of the reason why their games are not doing well.

More likely it's a game that doesn't work with the PC gaming market, most game genres either tend to sit more as a console game or a PC game, there are very few that work well on both and even then, unless they're done very well (can't think of one offhand), they'll usually sacrifice something for the consoles that'll put off pc users.

It's quite possible that one who contacted the customer service is not necessarily the one who pirated it.

What form of piracy are we talking about here? An individual d/ling it from the internet or some dodgy geezers churning out copies and selling them at some market? I'm not sure about other countries, but the latter is fairly rare in the UK afaik, it only tends to be found in the odd slightly backwards/inbred country town.

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

I've just been reading about the new Spiderman: Web Of Shadows game. It's apparently a terrible port with awful performance and hitching every few seconds on the PC. Regardless of any settings, even the most powerful of machines can't play this game properly. A half-hearted patch was put out that makes no difference to the poor performance at any resolution, but removes particle effects, smoke, fire, etc which actually makes parts of the game much harder to play.

Activision apparently has put out a broken game and can't or won't fix it. While this sort of thing happens with the aim of a dev or publisher trying to con gamers with a broken product, there is simply no way for devs to claim the moral high ground on piracy. Pirates may steal games, but big name publishers (Activision in this case) steal money from gamers. Pubs make it easy for gamers to hate them, and justify pirating a game to see whether they are being conned or not.

I expect that once word gets around of this terrible port, sales will be pretty poor, and Activision will be whining about piracy on the PC costing them money instead of the fact they put out a broken game on the PC that no on wanted to buy. I guess they'll think they need more DRM to make people buy a broken product.

People have been saying "if you don't want to pay for the game, then don't pirate it". I'd like to tell the devs and publishers "if you don't want to put out a working game, then don't charge for it". Then maybe people will care about whether your industry lives or dies, and will have some respect for your products and the living you make from it.