DRM vs. DRM-Free?

Tsukihime

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Jun 30, 2012
Messages
8,403
Reaction score
3,386
First Language
English
Protecting your resources with an encrypted archive is a form of DRM I believe.


I mean, isn't that how DRM works? It's just protecting the data. Doesn't make a difference whether you're gaining access using your own password or someone else's password.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Engr. Adiktuzmiko

Chemical Engineer, Game Developer, Using BlinkBoy'
Veteran
Joined
May 15, 2012
Messages
14,696
Reaction score
3,008
First Language
Tagalog
Primarily Uses
RMVXA
things like online authentications for softwares count as DRM and they are mostly to disallow people who did not buy the game from playing it... some media files also use a kind of DRM to limit/prevent copying...

hmmmm... if you're talking about encrypting the game folder that you will be providing the users, then after the user was able to put that game into his computer, then he can start redistributing it... which is what DRMs aim to counter...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

monkeynohito

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Messages
264
Reaction score
98
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
N/A
Yeah, I don't see why not as long as it isn't too much of a hassle. Pirating indie games is just too far across the line, we're really just proving we aren't responsible enough for the honor system. You hear stories about devs getting sale/user percentages in the single digits or low teens and it's time to get off the entitlement train.

BTW: Desura doesn't really provide native DRM unless you count people not being able to figure out how to download standalone installers or run a game outside their launcher. You can use your own methods.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Galenmereth

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
May 15, 2013
Messages
2,245
Reaction score
2,077
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
Yeah, I don't see why not as long as it isn't too much of a hassle. Pirating indie games is just too far across the line, we're really just proving we aren't responsible enough for the honor system. You hear stories about devs getting sale/user percentages in the single digits or low teens and it's time to get off the entitlement train.

BTW: Desura doesn't really provide native DRM unless you count people not being able to figure out how to download standalone installers or run a game outside their launcher. You can use your own methods.
I don't condone piracy, but there are many factors you have to consider.

  1. The lack of demos are a big source of piracy. While having a low price from the start sounds like the right way to go, it's not always about money; it's about time, too. Why should someone give your game the benefit of the doubt in terms of time investment and money unless they get a chance to try it out beforehand?
  2. Nobody starts out with trust. Indie developers often start out with "negative" trust. After all, nobody can vouch for the quality of your game other than yourself. You have no brand, no reputation and no existing fanbase when you start out, and it's easy for you to rip people off if you wanted to.
  3. Many potential customers wait to buy your game until someone else has played it and given feedback or written reviews. Pirates never have to wait, since they won't lose any monetary investment by downloading your game and trying it out. This is why statistics where a dev announce "90% of our users are pirates" are often skewed, because these announcements are usually made within relatively short timeframes; of course people who got your game for free will be the dominant user group at the start. Sales take time, especially when the product comes from an unknown developer. Also, see point 1.
  4. There's a simple question that needs to be asked at this point: What do you think is worth more from the two following choices, for someone with no existing reputation: 50 sold copies and 50 people talking about your game
  5. 500 pirates talking about your game
  • There is no correct answer, as it all depends on who plays your game. There might be a famous reviewer among the 50 that bought your game, for example. But the thing is, the more people who get to play your game, the bigger the chance that your game will get broader attention – if it's a good game, that is. So when you weigh potentially lost sales against potential new fans that might start out as pirates, you have to be very careful and not come to hasty conclusions; piracy is not as black and white as it's presented in popular media. It's not "theft", in the standard sense of the word. It's a copy, and the mentality behind that copy is a wildcard; it could be anything from a potential customer to someone who'd never consider your game if it wasn't available for free. If you're lucky, this person feels that your game is so good that they want to pay you for it after having pirated it. Take this into consideration, and try to find a way to make it easy for pirates to "redeem" themselves; Minecraft did this, and it worked out pretty well for Mojang ;)
 

Chrome

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Dec 6, 2012
Messages
835
Reaction score
30
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
I say, if your indie game is nasty good, Do not get DRM. First of all, as players ourselves we hate DRM right? So to help fight the battle against DRM, dont put it in your game. What is more important is that no DRM is a better marketing strategy for developers like us. 

- Players will love you more if you give them full control over their games.

- You are gonna want friends giving copies of their games to all their friends, which means more people play your game.

- I believe that a lot of people that were emotionally touched by your game will buy their own copy...after they beat the game already with their friends copy.

- DRM looks ugly, in the beginning of the demo, you get this ugly ass message box pops up. Its annoying and ugly and unprofessional. 

Piracy is not a lose of sales, people that will only play your game if its free will never buy your game anyways. 
 

SLEEP

grunge rock cloud strife
Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Messages
606
Reaction score
215
First Language
emglish
Primarily Uses
N/A
There is debate in the games industry as to whether demos increase or decrease consumer spending. An indie dev might not want to take the risk. In a JRPG, at least, people who like JRPGs to the point where they're buying indie games are highly invested in the medium, and know what to expect from the genre. If you just get a trailer, and some screenshots, they're usually enough to expose points of interest in the game, without the developer needing to risk a demo. Reviews will also come in, if the developer or website they're selling through has a following, so just wait for them if you want reviews. If you refuse to play a game without a demo, go find another game, one with a demo for you to try!

To repeat, game developers are not always altruistic. They aren't always satisfied by lots of people playing their game, if those people aren't paying for it. It's a fair assumption that developers who put a price on their game would prefer the 50 paying customers, because they provide the money to make the investment in making a game worthwhile. If a developer just wanted lots of people to play their game, chances are, they're release it for free. (And some developers do release their games for free, because they do just want lots of people to play their game! Developers hopes for their final products vary, and consumers need to recognize this!) Pirates who don't grasp this concept, and believe that "game devs should be happy we just play their games!" are a huge part of why DRM is necessary! I would prefer a world without DRM too, but it's kinda the fault of entitled gamers that it's become necessary... As long as it's non-invasive, I can live with it!
 

Tsukihime

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Jun 30, 2012
Messages
8,403
Reaction score
3,386
First Language
English
- Players will love you more if you give them full control over their games.
 
I refuse to give players "full control" over anything I give them. Is it really "mine" anymore if they have the same privileges and rights to the product as I do?


Even if people would probably love to get their hands on all of my resources, I'm not going to let them have it just like that.

- DRM looks ugly, in the beginning of the demo, you get this ugly ass message box pops up. Its annoying and ugly and unprofessional.
DRM is only ugly if you half-ass it.


There are many forms of DRM, not just some ugly pop-up.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Galenmereth

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
May 15, 2013
Messages
2,245
Reaction score
2,077
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
To repeat, game developers are not always altruistic. They aren't always satisfied by lots of people playing their game, if those people aren't paying for it. It's a fair assumption that developers who put a price on their game would prefer the 50 paying customers, because they provide the money to make the investment in making a game worthwhile. If a developer just wanted lots of people to play their game, chances are, they're release it for free. (And some developers do release their games for free, because they do just want lots of people to play their game! Developers hopes for their final products vary, and consumers need to recognize this!) Pirates who don't grasp this concept, and believe that "game devs should be happy we just play their games!" are a huge part of why DRM is necessary! I would prefer a world without DRM too, but it's kinda the fault of entitled gamers that it's become necessary... As long as it's non-invasive, I can live with it!
I don't think any pirate – nor anyone in this thread, myself included – thinks "game devs should be happy as long as we play their games". You also make assumptions that DRM is effective. There so many good arguments that can be made to the contrary. Here are three I bothered to dig up from my bookmarks:

  1. http://www.techspot.com/news/34881-uk-study-claims-drm-encourages-piracy.html
  2. http://xkcd.com/488/
  3. http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/a/4634
There is no such thing as "non-invasive" DRM. There are solutions like Steam where the DRM is mostly out of the way and works, but its very purpose is to get in the way when you don't have a legitimate copy. To accomplish this, it must perform functions to analyze the legitimacy of your copy, and nothing is fault proof.

There is debate in the games industry as to whether demos increase or decrease consumer spending. An indie dev might not want to take the risk. In a JRPG, at least, people who like JRPGs to the point where they're buying indie games are highly invested in the medium, and know what to expect from the genre. If you just get a trailer, and some screenshots, they're usually enough to expose points of interest in the game, without the developer needing to risk a demo.
I don't think you're seeing this from enough angles. A "JRPG" is such a loose term it can apply to almost any kind of RPG just faintly reminiscent of any number of Japanese RPG's. So no, it's not enough for people to make a decision. A trailer is a controlled video that might just portray the only good points of the game and nothing about the game "feel" or how well it plays mechanically. Screenshots have little value, especially if you're an indie dev that either a) isn't tremendously good at art or b ) can't afford / doesn't want to hire someone to do impressive original artwork. To use an example, Minecraft's screenshots of its aesthetics never got me interested in trying it. Neither did videos. What made me play it was a friend playing it while spending the weekend here, and me trying it using the guest login function. I bought it a few hours later. I know this is anecdotal, but do take it into consideration.

The main error people make when it comes to DRM vs Piracy is that they see things as absolutes. It is important to remember that any business – and making commercial games is a business like any other – is a gamble. You can make an amazing product, sell it at an amazing price and still not stay afloat economically. There are many variables in business: Marketing and luck are big ones, but time is also an often overlooked element. Sometimes it takes time for your product to reach a level of success. And marketing is also truly hard, especially on the internet where there's such a vast amount of marketing going on by bigger actors. Luck is sadly out of anyone's control.

Of course, when it comes to digital products, there's the issue of copies that you can't control. And that's what DRM is there to do: To control people from illegally copying your product. But the difference between digital and physical is that producing a copy of a product physically costs real resources; digitally it's virtually free (bar negligible bandwidth costs). Physical wares can be protected by physical means; digital wares are tremendously harder – if not impossible – to guard. However, digital wares are not in limited supply; a copy is not lost from inventory. Your stock is always full.

Again, the very important thing to understand is that a copy does not in any way correlate with a lost sale. And often, it turns out that piracy ends up being free marketing instead of lost sales.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Andar

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Messages
30,397
Reaction score
7,222
First Language
German
Primarily Uses
RMMV
Again, the very important thing to understand is that a copy does not in any way correlate with a lost sale.
Unfortunately that statement is not correct.

I said myself several post above that not every copy made would also be a copy sold when copying wouldn't work - however, that argument only goes one way.

There IS a number of copies that will correlate to a lost sale - the problem is that that's not 100% as some people claim, and no one in the industry bothers to get reliable numbers of how much percent of pirated copies would have been purchased when piracy would have been impossible.

Sometimes in the past I wished that there would have been a 100% effective DRM that couldn't be broken - because when that happens those people in the industry (especially the music industry) who use DRM as a method to force bad products into the market would learn that if people have to pay for things, only the good quality parts get sold for good prices.

And we would have finally gotten reliable numbers on sales, allowing us to decide wether the percantage of piracy that equals lost sales would be 5% or 50% or whatever other number...
 

Galenmereth

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
May 15, 2013
Messages
2,245
Reaction score
2,077
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
I suppose I should have specified that one pirated copy doesn't necessarily correlate with one lost sale. I usually write it like so for clarity: 1 pirated copy != 1 lost sale.

If there ever was a 100% effective DRM solution, then we wouldn't get statistics about piracy either, because it wouldn't be possible to pirate ;)

 
I refuse to give players "full control" over anything I give them. Is it really "mine" anymore if they have the same privileges and rights to the product as I do?

Even if people would probably love to get their hands on all of my resources, I'm not going to let them have it just like that.
 


DRM is only ugly if you half-ass it.
There are many forms of DRM, not just some ugly pop-up.
I'd like to point out, in relation to my previous posts, that when I mention "DRM" I'm talking about "digital rights management", i.e limiting the use – and redistribution of – a piece of software, not encrypting or otherwise protecting the resources used in the software. Encrypting the resources of the software in such a way that it becomes difficult to reverse engineer it does not in any way affect legitimate customers, so I don't think anyone has anything against that. But that isn't what DRM means either.
 

monkeynohito

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Messages
264
Reaction score
98
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
N/A
I suppose I should have specified that one pirated copy doesn't necessarily correlate with one lost sale. I usually write it like so for clarity: 1 pirated copy != 1 lost sale.

If there ever was a 100% effective DRM solution, then we wouldn't get statistics about piracy either, because it wouldn't be possible to pirate ;)

...
The saying about copies not necessarily meaning lost sales should work both ways though: if you don't buy a copy, why should you matter? I heard about one of the Hotline Miami devs helping people with tech issues on Pirate Bay and that's asinine. Indie devs are supposed to perform for the people who steal their **** now? Also, how do you show loyalty to paying customers over pirates? "Oh, you bought my game? Frick ya' then, I'm busy chewing this pirate's food for him."

The only thing that trash is advertising is a culture of theft and entitlement. It's to the point where a paying customer is a total pariah in these conversations and calling slavering, feckless jackals for what they are is like dropping an N-bomb. If someone doesn't want a fresh, streaming tract of rancid dog feces playing their game, they deserve a big thumbs up. Just because people can crack and torrent games (and honestly, how many people with the skills bother cracking indie games) it doesn't make them worth a **** any more than they are a definite lost sale.
 

Galenmereth

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
May 15, 2013
Messages
2,245
Reaction score
2,077
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
The saying about copies not necessarily meaning lost sales should work both ways though: if you don't buy a copy, why should you matter? I heard about one of the Hotline Miami devs helping people with tech issues on Pirate Bay and that's asinine. Indie devs are supposed to perform for the people who steal their **** now? Also, how do you show loyalty to paying customers over pirates? "Oh, you bought my game? Frick ya' then, I'm busy chewing this pirate's food for him."

The only thing that trash is advertising is a culture of theft and entitlement. It's to the point where a paying customer is a total pariah in these conversations and calling slavering, feckless jackals for what they are is like dropping an N-bomb. If someone doesn't want a fresh, streaming tract of rancid dog feces playing their game, they deserve a big thumbs up. Just because people can crack and torrent games (and honestly, how many people with the skills bother cracking indie games) it doesn't make them worth a **** any more than they are a definite lost sale.
I cannot relate to this mentality. I've encountered similar arguments before, like "if others can get what I paid for, for free, then I feel ripped off". Why? I do not understand it. If I were to feel bad every time someone else got for free something which I paid for, then I'd feel pretty crap 24/7 because of all the digital products I buy.

The devs of Hotline Miami have probably realized what I've realized: You can't beat pirates. And while some of them might be "entitled thieves", they're all individuals and have their own reasons for piracy. Many of them might use it as a demo and actually buy it from you afterwards. I would do what they (Hotline Miami devs) do, but then again my mindset is not that of a traditional business owner either :) Purely on a personal level, I believe one has to evolve with the environment, not try to shoehorn the environment into your ideal setting.

Here's a thought: If you treat people that behave different from what you'd prefer "lying, thieving scum", then they will be that in your eyes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

amerk

Veteran
Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2012
Messages
1,439
Reaction score
511
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
I think what's being debated here is to what extent pirating hurts. If you are showing off your game to 100 people, and all 100 buy your game, then awesome. But the reality of it is, you will probably show it to 100 people and maybe 40 or 50 buy the game. You lose about 50 to 60 percent in potential sales. Now, let's say 1 or 2 of the remaining people decide to pirate the game. You weren't making any sales off them anyways, so no big deal, right? Maybe, maybe not.

If those 1 or 2 people manage pirate and play the game and review it favorably, this could potentially drive the remaining 50+ people out to buy the game as well, thus the developer converts around a total of 80 to 90% versus the previous 40 to 50%.

Sounds good? Sure, in a fantasy world where pirates encourage others to buy, and those they are encouraging are willing to buy.

But the dark side of this is it's an unfair gamble that usually hurts more than it helps:

First, you can't bank on the fact that a dishonest consumer (a thief, a pirate) will have enough morality to provide an honest review, to encourage more honest people to purchase the game versus following the same dishonest tactics the dishonest consumer set in motion to begin with.

Second: Once the game has been pirated, it's generally easily attainable by anybody looking for that game over the internet, even those who are legitimately trying to buy the game versus pirating. While it's on their conscience whether to go for the pirated version or look elsewhere for a legal buy, the temptation is there, which continues to hurt the developer (especially indies trying to catch a break).

Finally: Regardless of the praise a pirate may give the game, to encourage more sales, there will always be other shady consumers who will feel that why should they be compelled to buy the game when others did not. Why can't they pirate the game and praise it as well? It helps the developer, right? Of course, this assumes the pirate even bothers to review the game in the first place.

Now, you can reason that the developer wasn't making the other 50% in sales anyways, so no big loss, right? In retail, most of our clients project realistic numbers in sales, and converting 40 to 50% is pretty good. That doesn't mean they want people to steal the other half. Just because they don't make that conversion right away doesn't mean they won't make it down the road, as word of mouth gets out. But when you pirate the game, those numbers severely dwindle, and the developer has every right to be upset over it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BigEd781

undefined method 'stupid_title' found for nil:NilC
Veteran
Joined
Mar 1, 2012
Messages
940
Reaction score
304
First Language
Dothraki
Primarily Uses
N/A
I think what's being debated here is to what extent pirating hurts. If you are showing off your game to 100 people, and all 100 buy your game, then awesome. But the reality of it is, you will probably show it to 100 people and maybe 40 or 50 buy the game. You lose about 50 to 60 percent in potential sales. Now, let's say 1 or 2 of the remaining people decide to pirate the game. You weren't making any sales off them anyways, so no big deal, right? Maybe, maybe not.


If those 1 or 2 people manage pirate and play the game and review it favorably, this could potentially drive the remaining 50+ people out to buy the game as well, thus the developer converts around a total of 80 to 90% versus the previous 40 to 50%.


Sounds good? Sure, in a fantasy world where pirates encourage others to buy, and those they are encouraging are willing to buy.


But the dark side of this is it's an unfair gamble that usually hurts more than it helps:


First, you can't bank on the fact that a dishonest consumer (a thief, a pirate) will have enough morality to provide an honest review, to encourage more honest people to purchase the game versus following the dishonest tactics the dishonest consumer set in motion to begin with.


Second: Once the game has been pirated, it's generally easily attainable by anybody looking for that game over the internet, even those who are legitimately trying to buy the game versus pirating. While it's on their conscience whether to go for the pirated version or look elsewhere for a legal buy, the temptation is there, which continues to hurt the developer (especially indies trying to catch a break).


Finally: Regardless of the praise a pirate may give the game, to encourage more sales, there will always be other shady consumers who will feel that why should they be compelled to buy the game when others did not. Why can't they pirate the game and praise it as well? It helps the developer, right? Of course, this assumes the pirate even bothers to review the game in the first place.


Now, you can reason that the developer wasn't making the other 50% in sales anyways, so no big loss, right? In retail, most of our clients project realistic numbers in sales, and converting 40 to 50% is pretty good. That doesn't mean they want people to steal the other half. Just because they don't make that conversion right away doesn't mean they won't make it down the road, as word of mouth gets out. But when you pirate the game, those numbers severely dwindle, and the developer has every right to be upset over it.
 
This all sounds logical (kinda), but the facts disagree with you.  The most heavily pirated media out there also boasts huge, massive sales numbers.  Look at GoT, the most pirated show currently on television.  HBO doesn't seem to care.  Why?  Because the show is raking in money.


Look at the movie industry, which constantly bemoans the affects of piracy "on the artists" (hehe, yeah, right).  They posted record revenue last year while crying about piracy at the same time.  They have been making more and more money each year.


So, beyond an overly simplistic thought experiment, where are your facts?  Show me some instances in which hugely popular shows/games/whatever have been severely hurt by pirates.  Crappy products don't count; they probably wouldn't have sold well anyway.  I say they get hurt when they go too far, i.e., by instituting DRM schemes which do little more than hassle legitimate customers.  


Take, for example, Chrono Trigger on Android.  Yes, you can conveniently buy the game on the marketplace. I would have done so, however, the game wants to phone home every time it is started.  You want to play it on a long flight?  Tough ****.  Well, screw you crappy, crippled, DRM laden version.  I would have purchased you, but you treat me like a criminal and I want to play my game whenever I like, so I'll just download an emulator and the ROM.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Everon

Villager
Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
6
Reaction score
7
First Language
German
Primarily Uses
All jokes aside - a lot of people copy games not to play them, but to be able to tell themselves and others "I have them", often without even checking or installing them.Those are pirated copies that will not cost the developer anymoney, because those people would never have purchased them anyway, but those cases do distort all statistics about piracy.
Oh yes, absolutely! This leads to the motivations for ownership:

  • Some people don't care whether they simply borrowed a game or not, so long as they can play it.
  • Other people don't care to play it, they simply want to possess, own it.
I think there can be some very interesting strategies introduced to utilise this psychological phenomenon, but that would stretch this topic.

So that is another vital strategy for selling games: sell a basic game, but provide new content to official purchasers for free.
*cough*inverse McAfee*cough*

You'll find you example to be what Microsoft does with their updates for e.g. Windows OSs: Buy once, get all additional updates for free.

As coughed, McAfee said: "Hey, let's give the software for free. But only once you purchase it, you get the updates and additional content!"

I wonder which pays off more...

  • Pirated Windows: Fine. You've got Windows. But if there are heavy bugs, you have to somehow find a way to pirate the updates, as well.
  • Pirated McAfee: Kind of difficult to pirate something you've already got for free, isn't it? And trying to pirate the thousands of individual vital updates every week or so, is probably nerve-wrecking. (Opposed to the 90% of Windows updates that aren't vital to the user.)

Even DRM that costs millions of dollars to develop by huge teams are cracked within days; [...]
As Microsoft, Apple, IBM, Yahoo!, Sony, Valve, etc. had to realise before: The 99% of the population that isn't part of a recognised software company holds a lot more power than any hired elitary programmer. Every 14 y.o. kid is a potential cracker who has no limitations, making even the government and military a toy for them. So, what do we as game developers have to say in this? Nothing.

In fact, Gabe Newell was smart enough to see that and decided to look for people from the modding community and other hackers, because he realised that nobody can compete with undiscovered talent. (Boris Vorontsov/"ENBSeries", anyone?)

I'd like to add that the only real weapon you have against piracy is making the best game that you can within your limitations, and spend time learning how to communicate with potential fans.
Precisely. This leads me to one of the - probably most important - questions we face in marketing etc.: "Who is your audience?"

Let me ask you a question: If I were to show you a game that weren't a lot different from what you've seen so far, but it's decent, you'd like playing it, would you buy it? Maybe you thought "Hmm, maybe.". But if I asked this same question to my own mother, she'd just look baffled at me and say: "...of course!"

Where am I going with this? Here: Emotional Investment

  • Family/Friends: They'd pay you double the price without you asking. But then again, you probably wouldn't even want to sell something to them; you'd give it out for free. They're not customers.
  • Acquaintances: Kind of what most of us are, more or less. We "know" each other, feel sympathy/loathing towards each other, but we'd probably not open each other our door at 3 a.m. to crash at our place for the next 3 weeks. It is more likely that we don't feel too weird about asking for money from each other when providing a service, and we're probably a bit less inclined to pay each other a whole lot, compared to your own friends and family.
  • Strangers: People with whom you've never exchanged a word. The more popular your product, the more of those you'll get. They are customers. There is so little emotional closeness that you probably don't even care about their real name and the same goes for them (unless they idolise you). It's business. This lack of closeness leads to readiness for theft from their side, and less scruple in exploiting them from our side.
So, if we ask ourselves whether or not to include DRM and similar mechanisms in our games/products, we really ask ourselves: "How close to my audience am I?"

Naturally, if we only have "strangers", it's survival of the fittest. They don't care about you, and you cannot truly care about them, as you don't know them.

But if we have a very active and honest, open, equal (in terms of authority etc.) relationship and communication, interaction with the consumers of our products, everything changes; those might even be people to donate and help you, whileas you might be interested to help them in return.

In a way we can steer that, in a way we can't. But one thing I - personally - feel very strongly about, is that there will come the point where we have too many customers and cannot maintain a close relationship to them. It's like having too many friends: You can't spend equal time with each of them. So, there, I believe, the majority of developers/publishers fail at setting their focus right:

  • For Profit: Do I focus on the 90% of customers who are strangers and give me money, but in exchange have to behave more strict and maybe include DRM etc., damaging those that are loyal to me?
  • For Fans: Do I focus on the 10% of true fans who'd buy every little merchandise and maybe look through your window at night (okay, maybe not that dedicated!), have less income, risk more piracy and other theft, but keep the devoted support that also aids me morally?
(It's not to be taken 1:1 and so exact, but I hope I brought across the point: The closeness to the "customers" heavily influences what marketing measurements we need to apply. Look at EA vs Valve.)
 

Everon

Villager
Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
6
Reaction score
7
First Language
German
Primarily Uses
One of the reasons I've always liked physical hardcopies... that and the fact I enjoy collecting books, CDs, games, and movies. Digital has its convenience, and physical copies won't stop somebody uploading the product online for free, but in the end somebody that wants to get a hand on the hardcopy will either have to resort to shoplifting (and risk being arrested and going to jail) or just going out to buy the product.
The physical products are sadly almost an endangered species. Whileas many people love them (also merchandise), the production costs (especially for international customers) can be so high that it barely profits for either party. That said, I believe that - especially in the RPG genre - books in particular would still be a profitable physical product that many people simply adore to have in their hands, and not on a monitor. (When was the last time you saw a game coming with really cool physical products in the regular copy? A map in "Skyrim"? Eh. I say a book with the lore and characters, or an artbook, is special!)

After all, piracy does have its consequences, and people who think they're "sticking it to the man" when they pirate either don't realize or don't care that they're really sticking it to the honest consumers, who will have to pay the higher cost when prices go up as a result.
That is because levering prices is the easiest, most simple solution. But in my opinion, if a developer sees that maybe 80% of his products get downloaded for free and he needs - let's say - 15% more to survive, going up with the prices is counter-productive and will result in higher piracy. Lowering the prices is a solution, one of many. Another I - personally - quite adore, is to use the pirates to your advantage. You've got 80% of all your potential customers, after all! Why not do something with them? (But that topic, again, exceeds the topic of DRM.)

  1. There's a simple question that needs to be asked at this point: What do you think is worth more from the two following choices, for someone with no existing reputation: 50 sold copies and 50 people talking about your game
  2. 500 pirates talking about your game
  • There is no correct answer, as it all depends on who plays your game. [...] It's not "theft", in the standard sense of the word. It's a copy, and the mentality behind that copy is a wildcard; it could be anything from a potential customer to someone who'd never consider your game if it wasn't available for free.
Words taken from me before I could utter them. Splendid!

We have some very, very interesting psychological concepts to fight in ourselves:

Instinctively, "money = good" and "no money = bad". If we shake a tree and a banana falls down, we're happy. If it doesn't, we feel quite frustrated. But that is primal instincts; "do now, get now".

Some thousands of years ago, a few clever human beings have figured out that if you take a seed and shove that beast into the soil, give it water and hunger for a few days (okay, maybe months), that tiny, useless-looking thing will actually grow into a steady source of income (of bananas); cultivation.

It is kind of a very basic principle that you only get what has been able to grow, first. And you can invest your own resources to aid its growth, as well as control your own "theft" to not make the thing starve. (e.g. harvesting more than nature can re-grow within that interval.) That's also what we find in children, which we have to ---okay, I think you get my point: We need to invest, speculate, help it grow and then have a steady source that can support us; symbiosis. (Also kind of what will lead every monopoly to its own demise.)

In selling games, we have to see that sometimes, money isn't always what will really feed us. The ancient non-monetary trading isn't really all that wrong. We have myriads of currencies! (Of which I only present 4.)

  • Liquid Market Currency: Give someone a game and you get - let's say - $50 transfered to your bank account. Nice. Risks: Inflation, transaction fees, currency conversion fees, possibly "thin money" (i.e. our entire credit-based economy that is prone to implosion), one-way usage, etc.
  • Presence: You give someone a game, he pays you in US dollars, but then gives it to 100 other friends (wow, Mr. Popular!) without giving you any money. You just gained +100 reach! Risks: reach has to get converted into liquid money if you want to buy a hot dog, unless the reach is so immense that the hot dog vendor knows about you and hands you one for free.
  • Service: Someone wants your game but cannot give you money nor really knows of many people to give it to. Simple: If that person is a blogger, make him mention your game in his blog. If he's a programmer, offer him to fix some bugs in exchange for the game. If he's a composer and you really lack good music, offer him to compose a nice album for you in exchange for the game. (Not the best examples, but you get the idea, I hope.) Risks: it's just a connection and deal between you and one customer that takes time and effort, and for a single copy of a game might not come to profitable deals. (Something like selling a car in this way, certainly is an acceptable option.)
  • Classic Trade: You give a game, he gives a movie. Or a free month for his online service, e.g. web-hosting. Risks: again, with individual, small games, you have to sell entire bulk shipments to find a valuable trade offer.
And as our friend said: "it's a wildcard". What do you really know about games, gamers and the market? All you really know is:

  • You have a product. You present it to people.
In so many cases the way someone uses and interprets the product can be extremely different from what you've intended to deliver. I give you a personal example:

I bought "Skyrim". The developers' intention was to deliver an epic roleplaying experience (probably). You think I played it like that or bought it for that purpose? Like hell I did! (Let's leave my personal opinion about the game out for a moment.) I simply bought the game because it was fun to mess around with mechanics, trying to gamebreak, speedrun, find exploits and mod it. To this day I only remember "Blabla dragons, blabla Blades, blabla Alduin" from the story and world. But it was worth it, it was fun, and it was my "Skyrim". - Your customers will decide what the game is you delivered.

Hence, we can't really justify surprise on our faces if we find that people simply don't consume the game we expected them to, maybe define "games" differently, "fun", "RPG", etc. And hence I also think piracy is a very clear expression of that: Our customers want to do something else with our product and we've failed to spot that, hence the price doesn't appeal to them.

(Then there's also the question of how customers want to purchase and attain your product or pay you. Maybe someone doesn't want to pay for the game, but would gladly create mods and collaborate? But this question related to the "wildcard" is rather vast, so I rather not take risks to hijack the thread and proceed. Apologies.)

Do not get DRM. First of all, as players ourselves we hate DRM right?
I believe that we make some psychological mistakes when starting to think of commercialising our products:

  • We're all gamers: Us, who designed the game, and the customers, who will play the game, simply love games.
  • They can do what we do: Simply because we have had more resources and determination doesn't mean that our customers may not be "better" at creating the same type of game than we did. Look at all the modders and how they surpass the original developers by far.
  • Gaming != Creative?: As a designer, we like to think of ourselves as "productive" and "creative", and I can understand when some people think of playing games as "consumeristic" and "passive". But from a psychological point of view, playing games is insanely creative and it's not random that "gamers" and "game designers" tend to have an incredibly big grey-zone (e.g. us, right?).
If we think of our customers as clones of ourselves (well, or simply "as humans"), we may see that all they want is to have fun, play games, be taken seriously, maybe given some creative aspects in our product (e.g. moddability) and not too much of that "producer vs consumer" barrier. In my personal opinion, the point where we consider someone "professional" or "more authoritive" because they make more money and have higher production quality, is when the gaming community starts to get divided into "producer vs consumer" and also suffers aforementioned "emotional distance" where theft is a lot more likely to happen.

- Players will love you more if you give them full control over their games.

- You are gonna want friends giving copies of their games to all their friends, which means more people play your game.

- I believe that a lot of people that were emotionally touched by your game will buy their own copy...after they beat the game already with their friends copy.

[...]

Piracy is not a lose of sales, people that will only play your game if its free will never buy your game anyways.
  1. Give them Everything: Personally, as a gamer who isn't just in for some casual "Angry Birds" fun, I adore to see the entire architecture and source-code of the game. I think it's also what makes the RM community so special, because we can look at each other's methods for designing and constructing a game and modify it. It's also more personal and you get to adjust the game to your liking if you don't agree with some difficulty setting the developer designed, for example. Risk: Theft of the code/resources and redistributing it under a new name. Solution: Copyright, maybe? o_O Also, if you tell your customer beforehand: "Hey, it's cool if you create your own mod. Just maybe credit me?", chances are that modding/hijacking will increase, but also with more connection back to you as the original author. (I know that here, we could discuss forever, but I just think that e.g. Valve, Blizzard and Bethesda didn't really do something stupid by encouraging modding, seeing how they're pretty high up now.)
  2. Make it Social: Compare today's gaming experience to the one back in the 80s/90s where you actually had to hang out with people to experience multiplayer sessions. If you can experience a game only alone, how likely are you to recommend it to some friend? Once you can discuss or play a game together, compete, cooperate, compare results, it gets really fun and obviously people will start to almost force their friends to get the game too. We've seen some interesting strategies in that department, e.g. "buy the game, get a free copy for one friend". Effect: wildfire!
  3. Experience matters: We tend to cling to things that we have an emotional, often sensuous experience connected to. We're more likely to pay for something while being in tears of joy after an outstanding ending to our favourite game and maybe even offer the developer our soul, than having made the first experience with the game as being a tedious process to free yourself from DRM and feel the tears of your wallet.
  4. Pirated games aren't a loss: As Chrome said, those people wouldn't have bought the game anyways. Now, there are two other options: Either they would've, but were too cheap for it, in which case you maybe lower the prices, or they would, but only once they could play the entire game pirated, in which case piracy wasn't damaging. DRM only shifts the semi-convinced potential customers to PirateBay & Co. or gets rid of them anyways. (There are good counter arguments, of course, too.)

I refuse to give players "full control" over anything I give them. Is it really "mine" anymore if they have the same privileges and rights to the product as I do?

Even if people would probably love to get their hands on all of my resources, I'm not going to let them have it just like that.
There are some differences between the different kind of "rights":

  • Right to use non-commercially: If you hand over the source code, all other resources and say: "Here's everything. Go nuts." but they're not allowed to turn it into a commercial product and sell it and/or any variations of it (e.g. mods), you don't really lose anything about the original product. People still need to buy that one to get the original version. Example: "The Elder Scrolls" series.
  • Right to use commercially under license: If you hand it all over, tell them to create their own mods and even sell those, but either credit you as the original creator, or give you a share of the revenue cash, you still profit from the publicity and/or cash flow that - maybe more talented - consumers create. Example: "Counter Strike".
  • Right to use commercially: You hand it all over and they can do whatever they want, even if nobody will ever find out that you created it. Example: "GNU Project".
RPG-Maker VX, for example, says that you can sell whatever you've created with it, without sharing profits with the software's original authors, but other restrictions apply, such as (correct me if I'm wrong) not hacking the .exe and .dll files, for example. In this case, since it's a tool and not a game (although that's one of the big problems: what is a game?), it may be less fatal for the original authors if people sell the games, since the original product (the tool), is entirely different from a game; kind of like saying: "Okay, you can sell stand-alone campaigns you've created in our RTS's built-in editor, but not the RTS itself."

I think it is very important to note that your intellectual property is automatically copyright protected (at least for visual art, music, stories, games, etc.) and other people make themselves amerciable by using it commercially in their own products. (Again, professional lawyers here, correct me if my choice of words is wrong.) Unless, of course, you specifically state that your resources are free for commercial use and hand out the license to the public or put it under an open-license like the aforementioned GNU Project, where (as far as I know) people cannot put their copyright on a product someone shared for free use in the community.

If someone illegally acquires your game, I think you needn't worry about them using your resources. They already broke the law, so whatever they do with your unencrypted resources, will be illegal to begin with. (Again, not a lawyer, but from what I know.) You can visit me in jail in a few months if I were to take the music of - let's say - "Hotline Miami" (which just sits there in the install directory, conveniently unencrypted as .ogg files) and use it in a game which I sell. Even if the game had been for free! (Once more: not a professional lawyer.)

In short: If my understanding of the digital rights and intellectual property laws is up-to-date, you may just leave your files unencrypted and open for everybody to edit, modify and look at, without risking that they will redistribute them. And even if you encrypt them in .dll or other filetypes, it is so easy to crack that. So, it's just damaging the curiosity of the customer. And guess how much the customer can learn about game design if they can look at how the game has been designed? It opens the market for new talent (like us) to get the help they need to develop their skills and maybe design a game of their own one day. (I'm also saying this from my personal experience of exploring RPG-Maker 2000 games back in my days, Half-Life maps, Daggerfall resources and some source code and encrypted media from games like Diablo II. Many great game designers have started as modders, btw!)

A trailer is a controlled video that might just portray the only good points of the game and nothing about the game "feel" or how well it plays mechanically. Screenshots have little value, especially if you're an indie dev that either a) isn't tremendously good at art or B) can't afford / doesn't want to hire someone to do impressive original artwork. [...] What made me play it was a friend playing it while spending the weekend here, and me trying it using the guest login function. I bought it a few hours later.
Again, something I know from first-hand experience as well as observation and just a bit of common sense. Look around you and you will find AAA game publishers release trailers of their games including only cutscenes. I'm trying to control myself here, but this is an issue that I've been facing for a very long time: production quality sells, not the game.

Now, this works for people who aren't very critical and just want to play a game so long as it looks good and demonstrates the hardware's capabilities. Hell, in 90% of all cases I can't even trust the term "gameplay trailer", because it is a machinima of the gameplay, where all the UI graphics get removed, in-game menu navigation doesn't get displayed, nice looking video filters applied and the camera angle modified, conveniently. Half of the time you're there wondering whether it is gameplay or yet another cutscene. So, no, it doesn't really show how the game is, since you have zero idea how it actually plays.

As Galenmereth pointed out: You have to play to be able to judge. Guess how I decided that I wanted to get "Ocarina of Time"? Saw it at a friend's place, played it, bought it the next day. Same with the majority of my N64-era games. Even today, guess what convinced me to buy "Skyrim"? The most anticipated RPG of its year which's hype didn't catch on to me? Having played it at a friend's place. "Trine 2"? Got a guest pass, completed the game with two friends online, had a blast, bought it. Agreed, this last example of "playing the entire game for free" does have its flaws, but if you look around: It works.

Another great example of extending beyond your own, purchased, registered-to-one-machine copy, is "Little Big Planet": Play it at your friend's place with your own profile and store your progress. Did the game sell exceptionally badly? No. People love being able to play together, because the game gets associated with good memories. And people like to buy good memories. Just recently I thought: "Why the hell did I just buy a game I already own on CD from the 90s?" The answer: good memories (and upgraded connectivity for online multiplayer, adjusted to today's hardware; but you get the point).

Guess why Microsoft had to back down with their tail between their legs? Because - amongst many reasons - they considered it a threat that two or more people could play with one copy.

It's not that different to buying clothes: If you can't try them on, you're probably not going to buy them. DRM in that sense damages your own sales heavily. (Same with region protection, etc., but that's just an entirely different monstrosity to look at. No hijacking here.)

Sometimes it takes time for your product to reach a level of success.
Who in here paid attention in physics class? Anybody? Nobody? Okay. Because then you might not know what I'm talking about when I say: v = x/t. (Where v = velocity, x = displacement, t = time.)

Whatever you're selling, you're selling it across a distance. In the case of digital game distribution, the "distance" is the difference between "insufficient reach vs sufficient reach", i.e. gaining enough reach to having crossed the border of "I can start selling my product and claim a revenue that pays off."

Now, if we toy around with the formula, it becomes apparent that: t = x/v. The time required to reach your goal has to do with your "velocity". And it doesn't matter if you're blessed with ingenuity and luck and t = 1 month or if you have to go the steep way that probably most of us will, and where t > 5 years; you will have to wait and endure.

(Needless to say, DRM is obstructing that "velocity", since you prevent reach.)

However, digital wares are not in limited supply; a copy is not lost from inventory. Your stock is always full.
Again, something I have to compliment in observation.

  • Shoplifting: Limited resources from our planet that have been painstakingly manufactured got stolen. It's not in proper hands. It's like stealing food: There's no way to magically "create" food.
  • Digital Copies: It takes some bits of physical reality, otherwise it's nothing that gets "lost". You still have your original source code and can duplicate it for each customer. At the worst, as our friend already said, you "lose" some traffic on your servers, which, however, can also be profitable if you have deals where visitor count matters!
Certainly, you expected money, but as we've elaborated countless times before: Some of those people wouldn't have bought it anyways. So, this is the closest to profit you can come. They carry your name into the world.

And as for the other people who are potential customers but simply get offered the choice between "free, pirated version vs expensive, official version", well, give them a reason to prefer the official version. For one thing - as mentioned above - give them a reason to care about supporting the people behind the product.

I know, it's kind of absurd that we have to pay so much attention to "winning over" customers from the pirate side of the force to the official side (with Luke and Yoda; who can say "no" to Yoda?), but physical reality is not different: You're not fast enough, treat your customers not nicely, make it a hassle to get comfortable with the product, your customer will go to someone else. It's been like this since the age of early trade and it will always be like that. Digital piracy is really not that big of an innovation.

To conclude this rather biblical text, I'd just like to say that I believe we hobbyist and/or indie game developers are the ones who can define the gaming market, before any of us reaches fame and might become victim to all the fighting up there with law and money. And something that I feel is of great importance to also consider here, is something people familiar with East Asian traditional cultures (or medieval Europe) will recognise: honour.

As much as we try to protect and distribute our products with monetary methods, I think behind every producer and consumer lies a human being that has a conscience of what they're doing. It would stretch this topic if I went into explaining other correlations to this phenomenon now, but I - from a psychological point of view - get the impression that the affinity to theft etc. has a lot to do with how intergrated a person feels into the community that he/she steals from. It shouldn't lead to public ostractism when a member falls out of line (as this would create an atmosphere of fear in the community), but people within a community may feel respected, appreciated and recognised if they do something honourable (e.g. donate a lot to the developer). And that's exactly what I think a lot more developers should focus on: Your customers are a community. They don't sneak to your store at night, fetch a copy, then hide in a cave alone. They love to share their experiences about the game and maybe create something entirely new out of it.

Alas, I think you get my point: Include the community and try to understand what they expect from you, and then you can also stop worrying about DRM and piracy etc.

(Further food for thought: Look at Russia and China's active cracker networks and the reasons behind them!)
 

Chrome

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Dec 6, 2012
Messages
835
Reaction score
30
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
To repeat, game developers are not always altruistic. They aren't always satisfied by lots of people playing their game, if those people aren't paying for it. It's a fair assumption that developers who put a price on their game would prefer the 50 paying customers, because they provide the money to make the investment in making a game worthwhile. If a developer just wanted lots of people to play their game, chances are, they're release it for free. (And some developers do release their games for free, because they do just want lots of people to play their game
When I said that "you gonna want people to give their friends copies of your game", I was thinking in a purely business mindset and profit. The more people that know your game, the more it will sell. The top selling games are the top pirated games.
 

Shaz

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Mar 2, 2012
Messages
39,664
Reaction score
13,271
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
The lack of demos are a big source of piracy. While having a low price from the start sounds like the right way to go, it's not always about money; it's about time, too. Why should someone give your game the benefit of the doubt in terms of time investment and money unless they get a chance to try it out beforehand?
Sorry - that's just nonsense. Every single game I have on my computer has a demo, and if I looked, I bet I'd find cracked copies of most of them - I've certainly easily found cracks of any that I have looked for. ALL of the games we sell have demos, yet they are all cracked within hours of being released, and we have frequent visitors to our facebook page and forum asking others to send them codes so they don't have to pay for the game.


Nobody starts out with trust. Indie developers often start out with "negative" trust. After all, nobody can vouch for the quality of your game other than yourself. You have no brand, no reputation and no existing fanbase when you start out, and it's easy for you to rip people off if you wanted to.
So, if a new restaurant opens in town, on the first night everybody is entitled to eat and not have to pay for their meal, because nobody can vouch for the quality of the food, the restaurant has no brand, no reputation and no existing fanbase? If you put in the time, effort and money to make and release a game, chances are you're not trying to rip people off. If you provide a demo, you don't NEED a brand, reputation or fanbase - you've given them something to taste, and they can decide whether they want to pay to have the rest.

Many potential customers wait to buy your game until someone else has played it and given feedback or written reviews. Pirates never have to wait, since they won't lose any monetary investment by downloading your game and trying it out. This is why statistics where a dev announce "90% of our users are pirates" are often skewed, because these announcements are usually made within relatively short timeframes; of course people who got your game for free will be the dominant user group at the start. Sales take time, especially when the product comes from an unknown developer. Also, see point 1.
Nonsense, again. I have seen a number of developers and portals who, the moment they release a game, people start buying, and buying, and buying. SOME wait for reviews, but MOST rely on demos, and a few will purchase without either. There are sites where people post cracked games - on those forums there are many just sitting and waiting for someone to provide it - they are not people waiting on the reviews, and most have no intention of buying, even if they like the game. I've seen devs state that the majority of their users are pirates, even a year or more after release.

There's a simple question that needs to be asked at this point: What do you think is worth more from the two following choices, for someone with no existing reputation:

  • 50 sold copies and 50 people talking about your game
  • 500 pirates talking about your game
I want 50 sold copies and 50 people talking about my game. I am SELLING my game to support myself - to keep a roof over my head and to feed my family. I don't care if there are 1000 pirates talking about my game - a "warm, fuzzy feeling in my gut" is not going to pay my bills. And those 1000 pirates are likely talking about my game to OTHER pirates, none of whom will ever actually buy it.
Honestly, you are making this up. All of it. I really get the impression that YOU are a pirate - one of the many coming up with every pathetic excuse under the sun to justify theft, and don't feel bad about it because it's a digital product. Despite the fact that you apparently "don't condone piracy", you're doing a darn good job of justifying (ie - condoning) it. Honestly, if you want real figures I'll go and ask some long-term devs and I'll tell you what they say. In the meantime, can you provide some sites and figures to back up what you say here, or is it just your opinion that you're passing off as fact? Because I don't buy a bit of it.


If I spend 12 months of my life making a game that I intend to sell, and I pay for my resources, and I pour my time into it - time which COULD have been spent earning far more in another job, and I offer it for sale, then I darn well expect people to pay for it, or to not play it. What gives someone else the right to take it for free just because they don't feel like paying for it? Try that in a clothing shop and see where you end up! IF they have a LEGITIMATE reason for not being able to afford it, then they can damn well ask me first instead of going ahead and taking it, and if I don't think it's just a pathetic excuse because they think my time is worthless, I may well give it to them. And if they just can't afford it because they've spent their money on cigarettes or alcohol or something else, then they can wait until they can afford it. I am not a charity. I am asking a more-than-reasonable amount for something I have created. You cannot assume "I'll tell 500 pirates about it" is an acceptable alternative. And I am not going to spend my time on the forum helping people who have pirated my game (I've lost count of the number of times people have asked for help with some obscure "bug" that nobody else has experienced because they're playing a cracked game - and those ALWAYS take way more time than usual to figure out), when there are legitimate customers who need help, and I'm working on a new game.

When I said that "you gonna want people to give their friends copies of your game", I was thinking in a purely business mindset and profit. The more people that know your game, the more it will sell. The top selling games are the top pirated games.
Or the more THEY will give it to their friends and family. Most indie devs don't mind you sharing a game with your family. SOME don't even mind if you share it with friends. But at what point does that little switch flip that tells someone "even though I could get this game for free from my friend, I really should pay for it"? If you give people the option to get something for money, or to get it for free, most will choose to get it for free, if they don't already have some kind of relationship with the developer.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Chrome

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Dec 6, 2012
Messages
835
Reaction score
30
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
Obviously there are two teams here lol. If there were hard facts and statistics about this then there would not be. 

As for me, I really think that when someone buys your game, that copy of the game is theirs. I think I would be such a ass if I only let people install my game on one computer. What happens if that computer broke? And eventually, the buyer have to get a new computer anyways. When someone buys your game, that person should have it forever. Not until their computer dies and especially not when they have an online connection. That would be BS. Even if there is hard facts that DRM net more profit, I would still not use DRM because of this belief, its the least I can do for the people that think my game is worth their money.

@Shaz: Yes, in the short run 50 buyers 50 talkers is a little bit more profitable then 500 talkers. But very soon the 500 talkers will put more food on the table then the 50 buyers. Look at the big picture. 

No DRM

Bob: Hey Tim!, you gotta check this game out! blah blah blah

Tim: I dunno, I dont want to spend 7.99 on it.

Bob: No worries, I'll make you a copy.

(Tim and Bob is all happy and excited, talks about the game and another friend over hears it)

Sally: Hmm, I never heard of that game I'll go check it out (buys game)

(Sally tells more people)

Repeat, Repeat, Repeat x1000000000000

DRM

Bob: Hey Tim, you need to try this game out!

Tim: I dunno, I dont want to spend 7.99 on that.

Bob: Oh...okay =(

LOL obviously it does not go down like that exactly, but you get the picture. But if you think DRM will net you more money then go with DRM...(and have the player be able to play on 1 computer). If you think that No DRM is better, then do that. =)
 

Ocedic

Dog
Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
395
Reaction score
67
Primarily Uses
No DRM

Bob: Hey Tim!, you gotta check this game out! blah blah blah

Tim: I dunno, I dont want to spend 7.99 on it.

Bob: No worries, I'll make you a copy.

(Tim and Bob is all happy and excited, talks about the game and another friend over hears it)

Sally: Hmm, I never heard of that game I'll go check it out (buys game)

(Sally tells more people)

Repeat, Repeat, Repeat x1000000000000

DRM

Bob: Hey Tim, you need to try this game out!

Tim: I dunno, I dont want to spend 7.99 on that.

Bob: Oh...okay =(

LOL obviously it does not go down like that exactly, but you get the picture. But if you think DRM will net you more money then go with DRM...(and have the player be able to play on 1 computer). If you think that No DRM is better, then do that. =)
Are you living in a parallel world where demos don't exist? You also arbitrarily decide that Bob will pirate the game, yet Sally buys it. Why wouldn't Sally just pirate it? Your entire argument falls apart and is based entirely on conjecture.

I can see both sides of the argument here, but honestly the anti-DRM people seem to be the ones pulling arguments and logical fallacies out of their ass. You guys do realize that 'DRM' has existed since the early days of computer games? Ever heard of the term Shareware? In the context of RPG Maker games, we're talking about a simple code to install the game, not EA-Microsoft-Always-Online-Always-Connected DRM that requires an online connection to play. Not to mention that the most popular avenue for buying and playing games on the PC, Steam, is in itself a huge piece of a DRM to begin with.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Latest Threads

Latest Posts

Latest Profile Posts

Things I thought would never happen but just did: I needed to use my snow shovel. In August. In the Northern Hemisphere.
So I finished Cupcake, now I need to figure out my next project!
Do I pick up one of my incomplete games?
Do I start something entirely new???
The possibilities are endless!
Am I the only one who keeps thinking TPBS means "Turn Press Battle System" and not "Time Progress Battle System?"
How is everyone doing? I hope you do not get into trouble. Also how many people here updated their profile? I see icon changes a lot.
And (un)surprisingly, I already started developing a old project as MZ code right off from the bat. Waiting the launch anxiously...

Forum statistics

Threads
100,673
Messages
978,318
Members
132,294
Latest member
dan989
Top