xepherys

From Xeph's Tech Blog


This is a topic that has had me a bit upset for awhile due to several different major issues that have cropped up. However, recently reading about the “two install” scheme from 2K Games regarding Bioshock and the recently changed scheme of “5 by 5″, I have to throw my arms in the air and ask, “WTF?

For those not in the know, the shipping version of Bioshock for the PC will allow the game to be installed on up to two PCs. This alone isn’t a horrible thing, however these schemes generally work using a hash from various parts of your computer. When you upgrade components, a lot of these schemes break, thinking you are installing on a new PC. As a geek, I upgrade my computer fairly regularly. I’ve been burned by this in the past, personally, and know other who have as well. Perhaps 2K Games does not care if you play Bioshock in two years, but that alone seems rather short-sighted.

The new “5 by 5″ scheme allows installation to 5 PCs, and a reinstall up to 5 times on those PCs. That’ll kick my ass immediately! I tend to reinstall my OS and games about every three months. Why? Well, because thee’s nothing quite like a freshly installed OS, clean desktop and better running PC. It’s the gamer-geek equivalent to rolling around in sheets fresh out of the dryer with the Snuggle sheets just having been removed. It’s wonderful. But much less so if at some point you can no longer install games you paid for even on the same damned computer.

My only possible assumption is that someone on the business side felt that money could be made or lost by restricting use of a game. While this is perhaps partially true, it also brings with it the plague of unhappy users, feeling the bane of protection schemes.

Though I have not yet been able to try it first hand, I wonder if the 360 version of the game can only be played on a single 360, or two, or five? Legitimate reselling of console games has to account for as much profit loss to the developers and publishers as does copying and such. Besides, in the end, anyone that is a gamer or is in the gaming business knows that there has yet to be a type of DRM or protection scheme that some vigilant cracker has not overcome. In the long run, it’s the people who KNOW such things exist and where to get them that are more likely to download and play pirated games. The people who don’t understand such things are the ones who ultimately buy their own copy anyhow, and often get burned by such schemes. Does this really seem good for business to anyone who thinks about it for more than a few minutes?

What was the last game that had a single-disc multiplayer offering? I thought that was a fair compromise. You install the game on one PC and install a game clone on a second. You put the CD in the first machine and as long as it hosts the game, the second machine may play along. I don’t recall seeing it anytime recently, but it was a novel approach to copy-controlling.

Of course, there are always copy protection schemes that are outright horrible, such as Starforce. I don’t recall even Sony’s Rootkit/Unlawful Redistribution DRM getting quite as much bad press as Starforce has. Starforce, in at least some iterations, has been known to compromise Windows security to make sure you don’t copy and play pirated games. Except it still doesn’t work (or rather there are still workaround). That sounds like a great customer service move. Of course Ubisoft has dumped them twice. The aforementioned Sony Rootkit on certain BMG label music CDs caused quite a commotion, not ONLY for installing a rootkit on your PC to prevent copying the music, but also because they used licensed code improperly in doing so.

“Hey, I know, we can use this code, unlawfully, to protect people from listening to our music, unlawfully”… I wish I could say it was only at Sony that such thoughts occur.

In the end, I tend to watch for such things. Games and music CDs that use copy protection such as this that can actively affect my systems are not purchased by me, EVER! When I hear of a game that does not have any copy protection or DRM at all, I almost always buy it, even if I’m not terribly interested, to financially support my cause. DRM isn’t really all that great for the content producer, but it is all too often problematic for the end user. How many CD copy protection schemes have made music CDs unplayable in certain CD players? Ugh! I just don’t understand why business types think potentially alienating the consumer is ever a good option.

If you’re reading this and you are one of those business types, I’m here to tell you that it doesn’t.

__________________
The prospect of achieving a peace agreement with the extremist group of MILF is almost impossible...
-- Emmanuel Pinol, Governor of Cotobato

My Homepage

SecretMethod70

Funny, just last night some of my friends were having a discussion regarding Bioshock's DRM. I don't know much about Bioshock other than that it's supposed to be pretty awesome, but these friends were looking forward to it quite a bit. Now, because of the DRM, one of those friends will be pirating it instead of buying it, and another will simply not play it. They're not winning any customers with this.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

Lasereth

You guys do know that if you uninstall the game, you get one of the installs back right? As in if you install it on two PCs, but want to reformat both, simply uninstall the game on both and you have the licenses back. Yes it's DRM and yes it sucks but it's not NEARLY as bad as people are saying it is.

xepherys

Lasereth. it's a matter of inconveniencing the consumer. As mentioned by SM70, pirate copies will still be available. 2K Games isn't selling MORE copies because of this, if anything they will sell less. Sure, Bioshock will still sell a metric shit tonne of copies, but it could be MORE and hence even more profitable if they didn't do it this way.

__________________
The prospect of achieving a peace agreement with the extremist group of MILF is almost impossible...
-- Emmanuel Pinol, Governor of Cotobato

My Homepage

Lasereth

How would sales go up if they took the DRM out?

Right now the developers are essentially letting you LEGALLY let a friend play Bioshock. Legally. Ethically, you can share the game with a friend.

Other PCs games are to be installed on one PC. Guess what, if you give Oblivion to a friend to try out, you're breaking the law. If you give a friend Bioshock, you're not.

This isn't DRM getting worse. It's almost DRM getting better...the developers understand how a friend would want to play Bioshock and they're letting you do that now.

If you uninstall the game you get the license back. This means any of your friends could install the game legally as soon as the previous person was done with it.

DRM sucks in general, but the main reason people complain about DRM is because they want to break the law and get software illegally and not be hindered by the people who spent time creating it. I think developers and even publishers deserve better than people stealing their software, especially those who LET you install it on two different computers legally, and <I>especially</I> those who create games as amazing as Bioshock.

If the licenses weren't retrievable when you uninstall (if your PC goes into Bork-Mode® you can simply call to get the licenses released) then I could see this being a major issue. But they are retrievable.

Dilbert1234567

and they said if you call them, they'll let you deactivate them too. so if your system crashes 5 times, and you couldn't uninstall them each time, you're still safe...

i'm going to buy a copy, after the first price drop, i just started school and dont need the distraction, i will still buy it though.

__________________
Donate Blood!

"Love is not finding the perfect person, but learning to see an imperfect person perfectly." -Sam Keen

xepherys

Lasereth, the reason is simple. A lot of gamer-geeks refuse to BUY games that have stringent DRM and copy protection, and wait for the challenge of cracking them themselves, or getting cracked copies. Personally, I'm far more likely to buy a game that does NOT have DRM. I don't make copies for friends, I just have issues with DRM. Frankly, I think copy-protection is amoral on the part of the publisher. Under fair use rights, one should be able to make a legitimate backup of an audio CD, video DVD or game CD/DVD that they rightfully purchased. If you BUY a book, you are legally allowed to make photocopies of the book for your own use. Various companies try to prevent this with legal jargon in the EULA disallowing a copy of the game, then make it harder by using copy protection. You know what? I still copy my games and use the backup discs. Why? Because I BOUGHT the game. I don't want years of wear and tear to mean I have to buy a new game. Sure, I take good care of my discs, but bad things happen to good people (and also to me). In the end, they don't gain sales by putting DRM or copy-protection on discs... the people who would download a pirated version will still do so. They just make it harder for legitimate consumers to protect their investment.

__________________
The prospect of achieving a peace agreement with the extremist group of MILF is almost impossible...
-- Emmanuel Pinol, Governor of Cotobato

My Homepage

Jinn

I have nothing further.

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

guthmund

Well, we can rest a bit easier....

This is the kind of thing that makes me glad I bought the damn game. I mean, the "collective customer" had problems, they've responded and even though I didn't have any install issues (360! woo-hoo!) and I'm fine with the FOV, to see them acting in such a manner...well, it makes me a bit happier that I threw my $60 + tax in their general direction.


Good gravy, did that sound cheesy or what?
I need a nap.

__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.

Scrub0

Ahh, piracy...how I love thee...

xepherys

I agree that 2K Games/Irrational is going a step further than most. And I'm glad I got the game.

My bitch is just with DRM in general. Lasereth's viewpoint is fairly common, but IMHO misguided. DRM does not prevent games from being pirated. Ever! In fact, not a game has come out that didn't have pirate copies available freely for download within days. Sometimes before the game even hits the shelf. So how does the DRM help? Many say, "It prevents the average user from making copies and distributing it". Bullshit! The average user isn't GOING to pirate games anyhow. The people that would CAN, and WILL often, at least in the sense of copying their own copies for personal use.

Protective measures are crap. They have a fairly poor record of killing fair use. EULAs are under fire yet again for trying to circumvent or prevent the Doctrine of First Sale. The harder companies push to "protect" their assets, the more they alienate consumers. Seems like bad business to me.

__________________
The prospect of achieving a peace agreement with the extremist group of MILF is almost impossible...
-- Emmanuel Pinol, Governor of Cotobato

My Homepage

Lasereth

Some good points made but in the end the main reason people hate DRM is because it doesn't allow them to get something for free. People hate the RIAA because they can't get FREE music that took REAL money to produce. People hate the MPAA because they can't download movies for FREE that took REAL money to make. People hate DRM in games because it doesn't mean the developers are turning their heads the opposite direction of people who want to get the game for FREE.

I hate DRM. I'm not a fan of it. But I don't see a problem with developers attempting to prevent themselves from losing money. Yes, it's punishing those who aren't pirating, but it does hinder those who simply distribute the game at will.

If my opinion on DRM is misguided then I'd hate to know how most people who hate the RIAA and MPAA and hate DRM are classified. Misguided is a bit of an understatement. You can argue all day about how DRM is unfair to honest consumers but a huge majority of people who hate DRM hate it because they can't get something for FREE that they <I>used</I> to get for free.

Derwood

i don't have stats in front of me, but my guess is that the vast majority of the consumers will not be affected by this DRM because they are far more casual gamers