Topic: "Giving up our rights to own the games we purchase"

[Flames_of_chaos]

http://www.destructoid.com/are-we-really-willing-to-give-up-our-rights-to-own-games--111425.phtml

This article is one of the more thought provoking articles I read in a long time about videogames. While it is very obvious in what direction the industry is moving in with DRMs, DLC, people who think how used games is hurting the game industry and what not.  It makes interesting parallels to the book, movies and music industry how used sales isn't really hurting the industry but how greed ultimately is.

[Pale]

Admittedly, I only skimmed that article, but it sounds like it was written by another person who spends too much of his time identifying himself with his video game collection.

Many of the DRM issues people most complain about in this day and age are really NO DIFFERENT than the DRM of the NES days....

What DRM you ask?  The fact that the NES was a piece of crap piece of hardware, and while the hardcore fans may still spend their time repairing, repurchasing, and intricately taking care of old hardware, the vast majority of the population can no longer play those games because [strike]their DRM expired[/strike] they broke.

Deal with what you are willing to deal with.  Everyone that screams and carries on about DRM won't effect its change, because they ARE willing to deal with it.  They desire the games SO BADLY that, that is the only reason they get SO upset about it.

[DAaaMan64]

Admittedly, I only skimmed that article, but it sounds like it was written by another person who spends too much of his time identifying himself with his video game collection.

Many of the DRM issues people most complain about in this day and age are really NO DIFFERENT than the DRM of the NES days....

What DRM you ask?  The fact that the NES was a piece of crap piece of hardware, and while the hardcore fans may still spend their time repairing, repurchasing, and intricately taking care of old hardware, the vast majority of the population can no longer play those games because [strike]their DRM expired[/strike] they broke.

Deal with what you are willing to deal with.  Everyone that screams and carries on about DRM won't effect its change, because they ARE willing to deal with it.  They desire the games SO BADLY that, that is the only reason they get SO upset about it.

Things can be taken care of, and fixed with a little responsibility.  This takes everything out of your hands.

[Morari]

Pale, you skimmed far too much. At least I hope you did. Otherwise, it is people like you that are allowing these problems to continue. As a prime example of what we as consumers (not just gamers) should be rallying against, look at Spore. You could only install that game three times before having to dick with EA's customer support. I still install and play SimCity 2000 on computers to this day. Diablo and Diablo II have probably racked up dozens upon dozens of installs throughout the years. Good games aren't forgotten, even if they're rarely made nowadays. I still hate Steam for the simple fact that I have to go through Hell to play the games that I purchased on my LAN with my family... I'll be damned if I'm going to buy four copies of a game just to install it on all of my personal machines, for at-home play. The industry is killing itself with moves like this. It doesn't stop piracy--at all. Worst case scenario, it actually increases piracy because that warez version you go off and download is not only free, but also comes with all of the system-destroying, data-spying crap ripped right out of it. Treat honest people like criminals long enough and soon they'll feel justified in committing the acts that they're already accused of.

Besides, I've never done anything more to my original NES than spray some compressed air into it and it still works perfectly to this day. Hell, it's even be left to sit in basements and attics for years at a time between being played with. Sometimes I get a wild hair and dig things like that out. In the future however, I might not be able to. I'll have to re-purchase those games because format shifting will be illegal.

[Flames_of_chaos]

Admittedly, I only skimmed that article, but it sounds like it was written by another person who spends too much of his time identifying himself with his video game collection.

Many of the DRM issues people most complain about in this day and age are really NO DIFFERENT than the DRM of the NES days....

What DRM you ask?  The fact that the NES was a piece of crap piece of hardware, and while the hardcore fans may still spend their time repairing, repurchasing, and intricately taking care of old hardware, the vast majority of the population can no longer play those games because [strike]their DRM expired[/strike] they broke.

Deal with what you are willing to deal with.  Everyone that screams and carries on about DRM won't effect its change, because they ARE willing to deal with it.  They desire the games SO BADLY that, that is the only reason they get SO upset about it.

It's not really just about DRM but  how publishers are crying fowl about the used videogame market and how it's ruining them yet if you look at other formats of entertainment such as movies and books, used sales didn't kill that industry and those industries are far more mature than the videogame industry.

The main point of the article is that now a days we are only purchasing the privilege to play the game and not really own it even on a physical format things like subscription fees, DLC where the consumer has to invest more into a product after they bought the game itself.   And then yes the DRM issue.

[Pale]

But look at what happened with World of Goo....

I'm sorry, but the computer games industry is either going to die, or DRM like Steam and Spore will persist.  The companies making these games have to try and turn a profit.

[Pale]

Admittedly, I only skimmed that article, but it sounds like it was written by another person who spends too much of his time identifying himself with his video game collection.

Many of the DRM issues people most complain about in this day and age are really NO DIFFERENT than the DRM of the NES days....

What DRM you ask?  The fact that the NES was a piece of crap piece of hardware, and while the hardcore fans may still spend their time repairing, repurchasing, and intricately taking care of old hardware, the vast majority of the population can no longer play those games because [strike]their DRM expired[/strike] they broke.

Deal with what you are willing to deal with.  Everyone that screams and carries on about DRM won't effect its change, because they ARE willing to deal with it.  They desire the games SO BADLY that, that is the only reason they get SO upset about it.

It's not really just about DRM but  how publishers are crying fowl about the used videogame market and how it's ruining them yet if you look at other formats of entertainment such as movies and books, used sales didn't kill that industry and those industries are far more mature than the videogame industry.

The main point of the article is that now a days we are only purchasing the privilege to play the game and not really own it even on a physical format things like subscription fees, DLC where the consumer has to invest more into a product after they bought the game itself.   And then yes the DRM issue.

Right, and my point is that there really isn't much difference between buying a NES game and having a limited use DLC game that requires a server....  In most cases someone's NES would break in about the same amount of time (if not faster) than the publisher's confirmation server would go down.

[Pale]

Also, Morari I'm absolutely stunned your NES still works.  I've owned about 6 of that system from the time I was a kid.  And no, I don't have a working one at the current time.

[Flames_of_chaos]

Well Pale the problem with your argument is your riding on is the "things break" argument hell just look at the 360. But the DRM practice and these other practices discussed in the article is done deliberately.  I don't know if it was you or another NWR staffer but I remember reading about how annoying it was that the staffer needed another copy of Spore just because that disc entitled the user only 1 unique online account or something to that extent.

[nickmitch]

At least if your NES breaks, you don't have to buy new NES cartridges. If my computer explodes, I have to buy all new software.

[DAaaMan64]

Not in the case of steam. Install steam, it records all the software you purchased. It is convenient in that way.

[KDR_11k]

EULA. You lost the rights over a decade ago.

But look at what happened with World of Goo....

I'm sorry, but the computer games industry is either going to die, or DRM like Steam and Spore will persist.  The companies making these games have to try and turn a profit.

DRM does not work. Period. They slap all kinds of strong DRM on the game that makes the computer explode if you install it twice or something but you know what? Warez are cracked. That means the DRM gets stripped out. No, this cannot be solved with better DRM. As long as the user receives a machine that can legally decode the message someone will figure out how to make that machine decode anything, how to emulate the behaviour of the machine or just how to avoid the need for the machine in first place. Yes, there is advanced, near-unbreakable encryption out there but encryption cannot be used properly on DRM, cryptography always requires the legitimate communications partners to have a shared secret that an eavesdropper does not have access to, breaking cryptography involves attempting to guess that secret through any hints that may be available (good algorithms require insane numbers of guesses). With DRM the legitimate receipent and the eavesdropper are the same person, he has the shared secret and all the seller can do is hide the secret away, hoping the receipent does not find it. If even one finds it (or a weakness in the DRM's behaviour) the DRM is broken, the cracked copy gets uploaded to the internet and everybody warezes it. Game Over. You often hear companies announce their new, super effective DRM. They never last more than three weeks.

BTW, WoG's piracy rate was no higher than that of DRMed games despite WoG not containing DRM.

[DAaaMan64]

Do agree to a EULA when I put an N64 game in?

[KDR_11k]

No but consoles don't have as much of a problem with piracy anyway. Devs just bawwwww about used sales instead.

[DAaaMan64]

So thats NO console in the last 10 year that has a EULA? 

Thats different then.  I've never valued my PC games to the extent of my PC games.

[Nick DiMola]

I don't believe in pirating games, but I swear to god I will start if this industry starts revoking my ownership and rights. I have a blog post I have been meaning to post, that actually relates to exactly this. Maybe I'll get that up in a few minutes...

[UltimatePartyBear]

BTW, WoG's piracy rate was no higher than that of DRMed games despite WoG not containing DRM.

I've been looking for a way to work this post into a conversation for a while now, and this looks like the best chance.  Brad Wardell heads Stardock, and he has a (sadly) unique take on piracy.  In a nutshell, pirates aren't customers anyway, so do good by your actual customers instead of worrying about pirates.

[Pale]

I'm not arguing FOR DRM, I'm arguing against being worked up and overreacting about it.

Piracy is one of the primary reasons consoles get most of the support now, and it's probably going to stay that way for the forseeable future... which I have no problem with.

The tricks publishers are putting in console games to fight the used game market can be frustrating, but they aren't the product of the sole concept of reselling games... they are the product of a massive corporation deliberately manipulating the used game market on a HUGE scale so that everyone but them is hurt.

I can tell you, publishers don't care about games being resold on ebay.  What they care about is Gamestop deliberately understocking new versions of games to create a false sense of rarity so that they can then sell used versions at only slightly below MSRP at a huge profit for themselves.

I will forever be FOR the player to player used game market, but this middle man bull **** that Gamestop pulls is borderline criminal and I WISH the majority of the population wasn't so ignorant as to eat it up.

[Nick DiMola]

I can tell you, publishers don't care about games being resold on ebay.  What they care about is Gamestop deliberately understocking new versions of games to create a false sense of rarity so that they can then sell used versions at only slightly below MSRP at a huge profit for themselves.

I will forever be FOR the player to player used game market, but this middle man bull **** that Gamestop pulls is borderline criminal and I WISH the majority of the population wasn't so ignorant as to eat it up.

Now this is something I can get behind. **** Gamestop. If these companies want to go after Gamestop, stop selling them stock and watch how quick they change their tune. Furthermore, why not lobby to get Gamestop recognized as a monopoly? The company must currently own 95% of the used game industry, but only get away with not being torn to shreds because they sell video games and there is plenty competition when it comes to that.

[KDR_11k]

And what if they are recognized as a monopoly? What then? Being a monopoly is not illegal, there's just more things that count as anticompetitive when you're a monopoly but I don't think GS practices anything anticompetitive in the used market. Big markups aren't anticompetitive, in fact they're making it easy for any competitor to come in and undercut GS. I don't even think markups like that are uncommon in other markets (clothing stores are very willing to give massive pricedrops, I suspect the markups there are huge), they're just unheard of in the games market since new games seem to be priced so all the money goes to the publisher and the retailer can go out of business for all they care.

[Ian Sane]

I don't think an NES breaking down is the same thing as the "off switch" that companies want to have.  I don't think the NES was designed to break down.  It was just a design flub.  If Nintendo really planned that then why is the SNES the ultimate iron man console of reliability?  Or the original brick Gameboy?  The thing is dependable hardware is the norm for Nintendo.  The NES is an exception.  A product breaking down is a lot different then a cut-off point where the company decides when it breaks and when you have to buy a new one.

And the difference is I can put in the effort to take care of old equipment.  I take very good care of things.  Almost everyone I know has CDs that skip.  I have only one that does out of like 100.  You rent a DVD from Blockbuster that's only been out a week and the damn disc is already scratched to f*ck from the, at most, two people that rented before you, meanwhile every DVD I own is in perfect condition.  But with something like Spore they turn the server off and my game is broken.  It makes no difference if I take good care of my PC or took good care of the physical disc the game came on.  It's broken.  They broke it and now I either have to buy a new one or hack the damn thing.  And pirating something is more work then just taking good care of something.

One important thing is that not all old games are made available to rebuy.  Sometimes the original out-of-print release is the only way to play the game legally.  I can't get Duck Tales for the NES on the VC because Capcom doesn't have the rights anymore.  I can't get Goldeneye.  And sometimes the original version isn't re-released but rather some remake that isn't quite the same.  I don't trust any company to not f*ck up a later re-release.  They'll half-ass it and not do it right.  Hell the f*cking Tetris company can't even do Tetris right.

I do agree that Gamestop is f*cking everything up.  So why are WE the ones who are affected?  Why not just stick it to Gamestop instead, especially when Best Buy and Wal-mart and Toy 'R' Us and Amazon are selling games?  The game industry doesn't even need Gamestop so tell them to smarten up or cut them off.  We're in the internet age.  Brick and mortar stores have no leverage.

And even if those who care are willing to put in the extra effort why should we have to, particularly when it may be illegal to do so?  Should I ever have to break the law and deal with the risks that come with it just to play a videogame?

[Morari]

Piracy is one of the primary reasons consoles get most of the support now, and it's probably going to stay that way for the forseeable future... which I have no problem with.

I have a hard time swallowing that. Piracy is just a scapegoat all around for developers who are lazy. Consoles are simply easier to program for due to having one very specific set of hardware. You don't have to take into account the thousands of possible combination that come about in PC configurations. Piracy on consoles is just as simple as it is on the PC. The only real difference is that you have to pop in a $50 modchip in a console instead of running Daemon Tools. Other than that, you're still just going to the Pirate Bay and burning onto disc what you find in order to play.

I do agree with you that GameStop helps no one but themselves however. Really, you're normally only getting a $5-$10 discount on used games anyway, and they aren't even guaranteed to come with the original packaging or manual. That's not a deal at all, it's simply consumers being ignorant (I know, gasp!).

[Nick DiMola]

And what if they are recognized as a monopoly? What then? Being a monopoly is not illegal, there's just more things that count as anticompetitive when you're a monopoly but I don't think GS practices anything anticompetitive in the used market. Big markups aren't anticompetitive, in fact they're making it easy for any competitor to come in and undercut GS. I don't even think markups like that are uncommon in other markets (clothing stores are very willing to give massive pricedrops, I suspect the markups there are huge), they're just unheard of in the games market since new games seem to be priced so all the money goes to the publisher and the retailer can go out of business for all they care.

A number of companies have started and well undercut GS, but once they get large enough to be noticed, guess what? GS buys them out. Its happened with countless companies, and without declaring them as a monopoly it will continue to happen. GS has absolutely no competition when it comes to used games, and it hurts the entire industry as a result.

[KDR_11k]

Shouldn't the FTC block purchases like that even without recognizing anyone as a monopoly?

[Flames_of_chaos]

And what if they are recognized as a monopoly? What then? Being a monopoly is not illegal, there's just more things that count as anticompetitive when you're a monopoly but I don't think GS practices anything anticompetitive in the used market. Big markups aren't anticompetitive, in fact they're making it easy for any competitor to come in and undercut GS. I don't even think markups like that are uncommon in other markets (clothing stores are very willing to give massive pricedrops, I suspect the markups there are huge), they're just unheard of in the games market since new games seem to be priced so all the money goes to the publisher and the retailer can go out of business for all they care.

A number of companies have started and well undercut GS, but once they get large enough to be noticed, guess what? GS buys them out. Its happened with countless companies, and without declaring them as a monopoly it will continue to happen. GS has absolutely no competition when it comes to used games, and it hurts the entire industry as a result.

Not entirely true Nick, Blockbuster started to be a little more aggressive with used games, there was always hollywood video. But in reality it's true that gamestop is the biggest used game seller. Smart consumers would usually use ebay, amazon market place, or game trading sites like goozex.