It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)Why punish customers instead of rewarding them?(191 posts)(191 posts)
(191 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
This is my favourite topic
Posted April 15, 2011
avatar
crazy_dave: I dunno, how many major AAA titles are released DRM-free? Though this may be a result of fatigue, I can't think of many or actually any major publishers who do that. Like I said, why not make the retail version as bad as possible if they wanted to attract users to GOG? Why offer the collector's edition?
avatar
sethsez: Because anybody who buys the retail edition and is negatively affected by the DRM would come away with a tainted view of the company and not want to do further business with them.
And ... that helps CD Projekt? That seems more of an argument why CD Projekt would not want to put DRM on the retail version, not why they not only want it, but demand that the distributors to put DRM on the retail version. And makes no sense to then offer it DRM-free on GOG. Remember CDP also distributes the retail game in Eastern Europe. So again, they want to give themselves or their distribution partners a bad name?
Posted April 15, 2011
avatar
sethsez: Well, this is why I was saying I don't have an issue with people who download a game to make sure it runs. What you're describing isn't that.
I hate the idea of jumping into another piracy debate, but I think the point is that one it is considered "okay" by someone to download and play a whole game without paying that mindset can rapidly cause them to take more and more advantage of it, or to justify a non-purchase.

I know a ton of people who download whole games to demo them, then despite finishing the game and liking it they refuse to purchase the game because there was no quick-save, or the menus were consolized, or whatever other stupid reason then can find to justify not paying money.
Posted April 15, 2011
avatar
crazy_dave: ...
I dunno, how many major AAA titles are released DRM-free? Though this may be a result of fatigue, I can't think of many or actually any major publishers who do that. Like I said, why not make the retail version as bad as possible if they wanted to attract users to GOG? Why offer the collector's edition?
Afaik none other AAA title has ever been released DRM free. The TW2 retail DRM conditions are pretty much standard conditions. Given that GOG actually proves that it is not necessary, one can wonder why CDP did not insist on better conditions for retailers. Maybe retail is just immune against anything except making DRM harder?

Making GOG more attractive to customers is not a bad thing either. I like that there is at least one DRM free offer.

Idea: Maybe it is, because retail version are resellable, but download versions not (depending on country). GOG explicitly forbids to resell their games. A retail, DRM free, resellable version would be like kind of heaven. Maybe too much for now.
Post edited April 15, 2011 by Trilarion
Posted April 15, 2011
avatar
crazy_dave: I dunno, how many major AAA titles are released DRM-free? Though this may be a result of fatigue, I can't think of many or actually any major publishers who do that.
avatar
StingingVelvet: A lot of retail games are still DRM free. Anything Activision releases that is not Call of Duty is DRM-free. THQ release a ton of games without any DRM, like Amnesia: The Dark Descent. EA bounces back and forth but often has no DRM, like on Mass Effect 2. There are smaller publishers like Viva Media or Southpeak who release a lot of PC-only software without any DRM, which should be fine since obviously Atari is not doing any marketing anyway.

Yeah, that baffles me as well. If you really want to convince a box guy like me to buy from GOG instead why make the boxed version so tempting? If it was just a disc in a sleeve or something I would totally buy it on GOG instead.
I stand corrected on that front then but it still makes no sense for CD Project to offer it DRM-free if they wanted to put DRM on the game and in fact pushed for it for retail. Then not only that but made the retail version so nice. The combination of all those various actions and objectives is just too mind boggling. It really doesn't make any sense.

It's still a better explanation that they went with DRM at the publisher's behest. Maybe they had deals with Atari since Atari released the Witcher 1. I dunno.

EDIT: Are you sure those are AAA titles? I thought the whole point of the GOG offering was that this was one of the few if only AAA titles to be released DRM-free?
Post edited April 15, 2011 by crazy_dave
Posted April 15, 2011
I have no intentions of playing this game as it doesn't interest me in the slightest & I am not exactly known for pirating software (I'm terrified to actually.... what with the Viruses & Lawsuits) but Delixe, you are taking this shit way to personally. I can understand the arguement of downloading the game to see if it would work (as I have payed for games that were supposed to be compatable with my hardware & then some but had major framerate issues, control issues, etc...), if you can't then fine.... but no need to act so damn butthurt. Let CD Projekt fight there own battles & give there own statement on the matter(which god only knows why they haven't already... maybe because there is no way they could do it without looking like hypocrites... I dunno).
Posted April 15, 2011
avatar
Delixe: Because that is clearly the worst DRM we have ever seen in THE HISTORY OF THE WORLDS!!!
avatar
Delixe: You should be glad it's just SecuROM. Atari and especially Namco are big fans of DRM. Namco even said Ubisoft had the right idea with the always online DRM.
Your view seems to be: "Suck it up, because it's not as bad as it could be!"

Capitulation to the lesser of two possible wrongs doesn't fly with me as an excuse to accept "less severe" DRM.

"Thanks for kicking me in the shin instead of the head."

I don't think so.

avatar
crazy_dave: Besides which I quite like this since we have a (relatively) controlled experiment in DRM and consumer preference. Consider how you buy to be a vote in determining the future and necessity of DRM.
The experiment is skewed by the fact that a DRM-free disc version isn't available. It's not "DRM-free" or "DRM". Instead, it's "DRM-free download", "download with DRM", or "disc with DRM".

You could compare the two download options, perhaps.

That being said, I pray (and cast vile black magics and perhaps a bit of money) that the DRM-free version does well, because idiots with marketing degrees will surely misinterpret the situation otherwise.

Anyways, tis bedtime for me. Catch ya tomorrow.
Posted April 15, 2011
avatar
sethsez: Because anybody who buys the retail edition and is negatively affected by the DRM would come away with a tainted view of the company and not want to do further business with them.
avatar
crazy_dave: And ... that helps CD Projekt? That seems more of an argument why CD Projekt would not want to put DRM on the retail version, not why they not only want it, but demand that the distributors to put DRM on the retail version. And makes no sense to then offer it DRM-free on GOG. Remember CDP also distributes the retail game in Eastern Europe. So again, they want to give themselves or their distribution partners a bad name?
Yeah, I misread what you said, sorry about that.
Posted April 15, 2011
avatar
crazy_dave: And ... that helps CD Projekt? That seems more of an argument why CD Projekt would not want to put DRM on the retail version, not why they not only want it, but demand that the distributors to put DRM on the retail version. And makes no sense to then offer it DRM-free on GOG. Remember CDP also distributes the retail game in Eastern Europe. So again, they want to give themselves or their distribution partners a bad name?
avatar
sethsez: Yeah, I misread what you said, sorry about that.
No worries.
Posted April 15, 2011
If you want to know if a programm runs, you don't need a demo and a demo actually could anyway not guarantee you that the main programm will run. Just make sure your hardware is not only at minimal officially required level but at least 30% above, wait for some month after release until several bug fixes occured, maybe ask a friend who bought it to test it on your system, read reviews carefully about requirements and common bugs and finally buy it and in case it does not run, go back to your seller and ask for fixing the problem or returning money. In principle this should work, at least in germany, however it's often difficult to put through your rights. There isn't really need to pirate. However, if people would only pirate and then immediately buy, I wouldn't object, but this seems just very unlikely to me.
Posted April 15, 2011
avatar
sethsez: Well, this is why I was saying I don't have an issue with people who download a game to make sure it runs. What you're describing isn't that.
avatar
StingingVelvet: I hate the idea of jumping into another piracy debate, but I think the point is that one it is considered "okay" by someone to download and play a whole game without paying that mindset can rapidly cause them to take more and more advantage of it, or to justify a non-purchase.

I know a ton of people who download whole games to demo them, then despite finishing the game and liking it they refuse to purchase the game because there was no quick-save, or the menus were consolized, or whatever other stupid reason then can find to justify not paying money.
I fully believe that it's not an immoral reason for piracy. But if someone plays through the whole damn thing after claiming they "just wanted to test it" then they were full of shit in the first place and just wanted to get the game for free. I'm talking about people who actually, honestly want to make sure a game works before buying it, not people who think it's a convenient excuse to "test" a game for eighty hours.
Posted April 15, 2011
avatar
crazy_dave: Besides which I quite like this since we have a (relatively) controlled experiment in DRM and consumer preference. Consider how you buy to be a vote in determining the future and necessity of DRM.
avatar
ddmuse: The experiment is skewed by the fact that a DRM-free disc version isn't available. It's not "DRM-free" or "DRM". Instead, it's "DRM-free download", "download with DRM", or "disc with DRM".

You could compare the two download options, perhaps.

That being said, I pray (and cast vile black magics and perhaps a bit of money) that the DRM-free version does well, because idiots with marketing degrees will surely misinterpret the situation otherwise.

Anyways, tis bedtime for me. Catch ya tomorrow.
Well I did qualify it as relatively controlled. :) I think it is almost as controlled as you can get under the circumstances and given that the world is not a laboratory. In fact, having the DRM-free from only one source which doesn't sell the DRM version helps the situation since you don't have people getting confused over what version, DRM or DRM-free, they're getting. If it is from GOG, DRM-free, if not, DRM. Having services offer both DRM and DRM-free well ... while we both might think someone should triple check, you know there would be enough people who don't read it closely and would thus screw up the experiment. :) Which itself would have to be controlled for. With GOG being DRM-free and the only DRM-free version, I suppose it's still possible, but much harder to do.
Post edited April 15, 2011 by crazy_dave
Posted April 15, 2011
avatar
Trilarion: Sure, and if it runs, you will delete this cracked version and immediately buy a legal one (or two because money obviously does not matter, since you would buy two times almost the same thing). Just out of curiosity: How long do you need to test a cracked version in order to know that it runs on your system?
Dunno.. Weeks? Months? Sometimes I play through the entire game and then (when I can afford it) I purchase it. Deleting the cracked version? No sir: I store it in my digital archive. I've got multiple copies of my games, "pirated", original or whatever....
Posted April 15, 2011
avatar
crazy_dave: EDIT: Are you sure those are AAA titles? I thought the whole point of the GOG offering was that this was one of the few if only AAA titles to be released DRM-free?
I'm pretty sure Mass Effect 2 is a AAA game, yes.

avatar
sethsez: I fully believe that it's not an immoral reason for piracy. But if someone plays through the whole damn thing after claiming they "just wanted to test it" then they were full of shit in the first place and just wanted to get the game for free. I'm talking about people who actually, honestly want to make sure a game works before buying it, not people who think it's a convenient excuse to "test" a game for eighty hours.
Yes, there are people who are quite honorable about it and I have no issue with them. There is a guy I debate with on Blue's News named "Jerykk" who downloads every game and plays it for a while, then buys it if he likes it. I 100% believe he does that and is honest and honorable about it.

The issue is solely that the ability to do that does not work generally because most people are not that honest.
Posted April 15, 2011
avatar
Trilarion: If you want to know if a programm runs, you don't need a demo and a demo actually could anyway not guarantee you that the main programm will run. Just make sure your hardware is not only at minimal officially required level but at least 30% above, wait for some month after release until several bug fixes occured, maybe ask a friend who bought it to test it on your system, read reviews carefully about requirements and common bugs and finally buy it and in case it does not run, go back to your seller and ask for fixing the problem or returning money. In principle this should work, at least in germany, however it's often difficult to put through your rights. There isn't really need to pirate. However, if people would only pirate and then immediately buy, I wouldn't object, but this seems just very unlikely to me.
In America retailers frequently just won't take PC games back unless the disc was snapped in half in the case or something, because DRM makes it too easy to game the system (you could theoretically buy a retail Steamworks game, tie it to your account, return it to the store, and still have the game on Steam). If you could actually take games back for legitimate reasons then it wouldn't be an issue.

And honestly, given the non-standardized nature of PC hardware I don't think a consumer would be out of line for expecting the opportunity to test run a game before buying it. Given DRM that effectively eliminates the used market, I think it's the least we should expect.
Post edited April 15, 2011 by sethsez
Posted April 15, 2011
avatar
crazy_dave: And many companies if they found out who you were would indeed sue you. :)

Sorry, couldn't resist, you walked right into that one.
Heh, my VPN service will welcome them ;-)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)Why punish customers instead of rewarding them?(191 posts)(191 posts)
(191 posts)