If people buy it it is.
Entitled gamers, corrupt press and greedy publishers
- Thread starter patsu
- Start date
If people buy it it is.
No problem. iPad's aren't productivity. Watching movies on an iPad or Android tablet isn't productivity. Playing games on one isn't either. Should those require always online DRM?
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Really, when pretty much anything that isn't easy to pirate or even possible to pirate generates multiple times the sales of pretty much anything that can be pirated, then it is a good example.
Oh, I hear some people say, but those games only do well because you can't play them on console. Well, that doesn't help out most RTS games which are easily pirated but can't, generally, be played on console. It doesn't help action RPG games (similar to Diablo) which are easy to pirate. Torchlight 2, which had incredible internet word of mouth took 3 months to get 1 million sales. Something Diablo 3 did in the first couple hours of sales. And yet I see more people playing Torchlight 2 than I do Diablo 3. I'd be willing to bet that more people play Torchlight 2 than Diablo 3 as well. Which shouldn't come as a surprise as some people were playing Torchlight 2 a week or so before it was actually released (hint they didn't pay for it and still haven't paid for it). Oh and Diablo 3 had sold over 12 million by the end of 2012. Who knows what it's at now.
It does help really really crappy MMO games sell more than most multiplatform console games. If those MMOs were easily pirated then they likely wouldn't have been purchased even remotely as much as they are, but probably would have gotten played even more than what they do. Witness what happens when a paid MMO goes F2P.
So, obviously not everyone that pirates a game would buy it. But there's a buttload of people that won't buy it if they can pirate it.
Sure, as soon as the platform itself is locked down as a DRM'd machine then we're good to go. Oh wait, can't do that. During Win8 development there was a rumor that Win8 devices would be locked down and then the internet just about exploded into a tizzy. Turns out only WinRT devices would use hardware to lock down the system. I'd be willing to bet that if the iPad were an open system where the user could install anything they wanted that apps for sale would require an online connection to use them so that Apple could verify that the user paid for what they are using.
Hence why consoles, smartphones, etc. don't need to require an always online connection. Probably also one of the reasons (among many) why apps do so poorly on Android compared to iOS. Most Android devices are much easier to root and run pirated software on. Especially when the OS isn't constantly updated to remove rooting exploits and/or brick devices that the user has rooted.
Regards,
SB
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Except they don't generate "multiple times the sales".
Take some games launched within the last five years:
Sims 3 (PC only)- pirated after 1 week: >10 million copies sold (not to mention all the expansion packs)
Skyrim - pirated after 2 days: >10 million copies sold (7 million in the first week)
Portal 2 - pirated after 2 days: >4 million copies sold.
Diablo 3 sales took a comfy piggyback from its franchise name, developer/publisher name and lots of marketing money. The next Diablo won't be as lucky.
In fact, I bet the Diablo 3 sales on PS3 will tank hard, though the game isn't really demanding so porting it shouldn't take too much man power.
Simcity 2013 isn't off to a great start. I saw numbers of 1 million for the first two weeks, which is pointing to lower sales than its predecessors (sales being halted in major retailers and negative reviews won't help either) -> in a market that is much stronger than it was 10 years ago (Simcity 4).
So where does your theory of "always online sells more games" go with Simcity 2013?
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
12 million which are obviously omitting the massive refunds that happened in South Korea.
Yes, Diablo 3 made shitloads of dirty money at the cost of screwing the franchise, the public opinion on the developer and the publisher, the confidence that paying customers had in the whole industry and a large pie of their fanbase.
Yes, it was worth it from the point of view of anyone who cares a whole lot more about money than gamers and the gaming industry.
It's worth it if you're only concerned about making money very quickly at the cost of screwing all the studios when PC gamers get sick of this blatant abuse and migrate to consoles.
Diablo 3's monetary success makes me sick.
But let them try and pull another one of those and see how strong the backlash strikes them. I dare them.
Diablo 3 caught the people unprepared. Simcity 2013 didn't, and will be the proof that always-online isn't welcome by PC gamers.
If not, I (and many others) will just migrate to the PS4 and let the PC industry rot from within.
I wouldn't bet on that, the predecessor did nothing like that number in the first couple of weeks after going on sale.
For whatever reason the Sim titles are one of the few games that tend to have legs and continue to sell for many months after release. There is an phenomena with expansion packs where the release of an expansion spurs a spike in the sales of the original title.
But I don't think always online is a factor either way in this case.
I personally find DRM objectionable, but piracy is an issue, in the 80's when we added copy protection to titles, the only goal was to make it inconvenient for person X to make a copy for person Y. But the distribution of hacked copies was much more difficult.
The problem is that if it's as easy as click a link download and install to get a title for free then many will. I absolutely do not believe that even the majority who pirate would buy, but that doesn't stop the impact being significant.
I don't think the industry can ignore piracy, and I don't think they can stop/limit it for predominantly single player experiences. So I think you'll see a movement in business model towards games designed around content on publisher servers, probably a push towards freemium given how many people I talk to seem to be enamored by the model.
If you can't reliably charge (and get paid) for the title itself, as a business you find other ways to monetize or you go out of business.
With regard to Torchlight 2 VS Diablo 3, I think that Torchlight 2 benefited a lot from the Diablo hiccups and the surrounding polemic.
I bough both games, Diablo 3 is a much better game imo. Torchlight 2 has many issues, visibility sucks more than often, I would say it can be a bit to fast (which along with the visibility issue makes things complicated).
But the main win for Diablo 3 is simply gameplay, the trade off Blizzard made wrt number of active skills and how if plays, you can channel some skills, imo it is much better as an action game.
Now if they somehow bring some console feature to the pc games (if the community want them to they are likely to do it), it would turn awesome.
Torchlight 2 is over rated, Titan quest is better (a lot better with the fan patch) both feel old in their gameplay mechanic vs diablo 3 which is why now when I want some H&S I go for Diablo 3 without thinking much about it.
That is a good example of how the web works and how our short term memory society works, I spend less then 10$ on titan quest IM, 60$ on Diablo 3 and 20$ on Torchlight 2, out of the 3 Torchlight over the less bang for bucks by a large extend (to the point were I almost regret the buy). Even with the still to be release modding tool TQIM is significantly better than Torchlight 2. I found amazing how such a run of the mill Hack 'n slash got that much traction, there is simply nothing new or that is not bog standard to that game. Looking back I'm sure that I should have bought Diablo 2 instead.
I bough both games, Diablo 3 is a much better game imo. Torchlight 2 has many issues, visibility sucks more than often, I would say it can be a bit to fast (which along with the visibility issue makes things complicated).
But the main win for Diablo 3 is simply gameplay, the trade off Blizzard made wrt number of active skills and how if plays, you can channel some skills, imo it is much better as an action game.
Now if they somehow bring some console feature to the pc games (if the community want them to they are likely to do it), it would turn awesome.
Torchlight 2 is over rated, Titan quest is better (a lot better with the fan patch) both feel old in their gameplay mechanic vs diablo 3 which is why now when I want some H&S I go for Diablo 3 without thinking much about it.
That is a good example of how the web works and how our short term memory society works, I spend less then 10$ on titan quest IM, 60$ on Diablo 3 and 20$ on Torchlight 2, out of the 3 Torchlight over the less bang for bucks by a large extend (to the point were I almost regret the buy). Even with the still to be release modding tool TQIM is significantly better than Torchlight 2. I found amazing how such a run of the mill Hack 'n slash got that much traction, there is simply nothing new or that is not bog standard to that game. Looking back I'm sure that I should have bought Diablo 2 instead.
Last edited by a moderator:
Absurd nonsense. Heart of the Swarm has the same drm strat and it to is selling bucket loads. You only notice the effect on simcity because EA cheaped out on the server side and low balled how well it would sell. Online drm is here to stay but like you said, you can and should support platforms that don't have it. Ps4 is a perfect alternative.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Another absurd nonsense is the fact that you don't know that Starcraft 2 has a one-time only activation, and the single-player campaign is playable completely offline.
It has nothing to do with Simcity's always-online DRM, where you can't even save the game if the connection goes off.
Starcraft is bigger than the NHL, who plays starcraft for its single player and not it's competitive multiplayer? 13 million people aren't going to buy starcraft to play it offline and single player. Online drm is here to stay, deal with it or go do something else! lol.
Last edited by a moderator:
You are making his point, or.. i am confused? The game sells 13 million copies and doesn't require always on.. what was it you said? Deal with it?
Well with Starcraft 2 i guess we can deal with a Steam Like activation which has nothing to do at all with Always Online Digital RIghts Management like we see in Diablo 3..
By the way, i never played SC2 online
Sc2 competitive multiplayer requires you be online all the time. That's where they make their money. That's why the game sells well. Otherwise it's just you up against computer controlled ai ( which isn't competition )and it wouldn't sell. Nobody is playing sc offline, that's not why people buy this game. You best believe if Blizzard only made their money through the single player game there would be online drm for the single player too. Blizzard already set a precedent with Diablo 3, to deny that when the evidence speaks for itself makes you delusional.
By the way, i never played SC2 online
...and you're full of crap, unless you basically turn off your internet every time you boot up sc, you've been online. Nobody is going to buy you've never been online with sc2.
Is It because your facts was so wrong you are angry?
Does single player sc2 require always on?
No.
Did it sell "13 million copies"?
Yes.
Did i play a mulltiplayer sc2 game, no not afaik, and it really doesn't matter.
Why not just admit you didn't know and roll on, there is plenty else to discuss.
I've never played any SC2 but single player campaign. I'm sure you can look me up on Bliz and see 0 games.
Ditto for SimCity5...CivV...and many others.
Composition fallacies.
It was evident that when I was talking about starcraft being always online I was speaking about the multiplayer, not doing 10 mission bot simulator. Cherry picking the context to support your fallacious position isn't even a feat to get worked up about. Starcraft sells 10s of millions because of it's multiplayer, the inclusion of single player, that's just a multiplayer re-skin bot simulator, doesn't even matter to the brand or who it sells too, this is plainly evident otherwise, you'll see online drm there too.
If you playing sc2 at anytime you'll need to be online to activate the game. You're still full of crap and no, I'm still not buying you've never had your internet connection off even after activating it.
Last edited by a moderator:
A mulltiplayer online game would have a hard time not being online.
Similar threads
