DRM, Online Pass, Project Ten Dollar and the like

[McBeeferton]

 

Now this is what I call DRM.

[RockyRan]

I still really wish we could produce some real numbers on whether or not DRM like this actually impacts sales.

 

The thing is, the vast majority of publishers who shoehorn DRM into their games don't even know what the hell they're doing when it comes to anti-piracy, as evidenced by the fact that there hasn't really been any real movement within the industry to actually study and document the potential impact of piracy on sales. Most publishers just take a simplistic "RABBLE RABBLE PIRACY BE BAD!" and use that to throw DRM into whatever. They really don't care, they just don't like the idea of people playing their games without paying for them. Even if said people wouldn't have bought the game had there been no possibility of pirating it.

[Yantelope]

The only numbers I can find is that it seems that most PC games sell 1/10 of their console counterparts according to VGChartz. Assassin's Creed 2 sold just 120,000 copies in europe vs. 2.13 million copies on the PS3. If anything you'd think AC2 would be an example of DRM not helping PC game sales.

[CorgiShinobi]

Cracked Article

 

Going along with Beefy, maybe we should go back to this for anti-piracy measures?

[Kovach_]

The only numbers I can find is that it seems that most PC games sell 1/10 of their console counterparts according to VGChartz. Assassin's Creed 2 sold just 120,000 copies in europe vs. 2.13 million copies on the PS3. If anything you'd think AC2 would be an example of DRM not helping PC game sales.

 

This. I took AC2 on the PS3 just because of the DRM.

[RockyRan]

The only numbers I can find is that it seems that most PC games sell 1/10 of their console counterparts according to VGChartz. Assassin's Creed 2 sold just 120,000 copies in europe vs. 2.13 million copies on the PS3. If anything you'd think AC2 would be an example of DRM not helping PC game sales.

 

Indeed. When games have horrid DRM I either don't buy the game at all or get it on the cheap on the consoles.

[Yantelope]

I know I got AC2 on the console because of the DRM. I suppose the counter point to this is that they didn't really lose any sales from us because we bought it on the console anyway. I guess you'd kind of have to adjust for that and find out what % of PC only gamers chose not to buy the game at all.

[Saturnine Tenshi]

If I don't like a game's DRM, I don't buy it at all. On any platform. Unless I buy it used. Pretty much because of what Yantelope said: "I suppose the counter point to this is that they didn't really lose any sales from us because we bought it on the console anyway."

[excel_excel]

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/05/26/street-fighter-4-arcade-edition-drm/

 

Where does this come on the scale of "Why Would they Do That?" to "Well at least it didn't require a tracking chip too"

 

For me its "how does this do anything but hurt the legitimate consumer?"

 

Why are some publishers so allergic to Steamworks? It must be something more then GFWL is cheaper, or trying to force people to use the publishers own Download service?

[Yantelope]

So the Rockstar Pass is out. I bought it. I think it's a brilliant way of convincing customers to keep their copies of the game and not sell them back. I didn't even think about it until I read joystiq's quote

 

"If this seemingly smart gambit works as planned, it would give players a reason to keep their copies off of the used game shelves until just before August -- after all, they've already paid for the DLC, right? -- so we'll be interested to see if it plays out that way."

 

If you're going to fight used sales this seems like a better way to do it IMO.

[jayc4life]

So the Rockstar Pass is out. I bought it. I think it's a brilliant way of convincing customers to keep their copies of the game and not sell them back. I didn't even think about it until I read joystiq's quote

 

"If this seemingly smart gambit works as planned, it would give players a reason to keep their copies off of the used game shelves until just before August -- after all, they've already paid for the DLC, right? -- so we'll be interested to see if it plays out that way."

 

If you're going to fight used sales this seems like a better way to do it IMO.

I agree. If it's well-spaced out, it's great, especially in a story-based environment like LA Noire. I can only imagine how many used copies of something like Heavy Rain that players would still have on their shelves if they had something like this (although DLC was planned, but soon scrapped after only one episode, The Taxidermist).

 

SmackDown vs Raw did this as well last year, and I thought it was a great idea. Good to see someone else picking up the sales model too. I'll definitely get it when the PSN Store comes back, no question about it.

[excel_excel]

 

 

SmackDown vs Raw did this as well last year, and I thought it was a great idea. Good to see someone else picking up the sales model too. I'll definitely get it when the PSN Store comes back, no question about it.

I got that cost 800 points or a tenner on PSN. it was called 'Fan Axxess'. I felt robbed, the DLC was just crap. First off there was pre-order exclusive shit in different shops that was never made available, like Bret Hart, The Undertaker's alternate Ministry of Darkness attire, three alternate outfits for Randy Orton and the WWE Tribute to the Troops arena. And the actual DLC was rubbish.

[jayc4life]

Yeah that was a bit shit. Bret Hart was released later though, but afaik the Fan Axxess didn't cover that. Undertaker's alternate was regular DLC though, and the Tribute to the Troops arena was a regular unlockable

 

Good idea, yeah. Just bad DLC though. Step in the right direction though.

[deanb]

http://dvice.com/arc...om-tries-to.php

 

Posted this on Twitter earlier. The DRM scheme locks the game save. There's no "New Game" there's no saving two games at once. It's probably the worst DRM I've seen to date if true.

[Yantelope]

Yeah, I'm fuzzy on what the implications of one game save are. I mean, what kind of unlocks would you be stuck with? Surely it won't be such that you can only play the game one time through. I wonder if it'd be like having Red Dead Redemption but once your ticker hits 100% then it stays there forever. If that were true then that would be pretty lame.

 

Honestly though, isn't the battle on used games already won? Once things go all digital distribution it's over.

[deanb]

You unlock items and skills, as well as high scores. You get the game used, you don't have the pleasure of earning any of those yourself. It would be like playing LBP but all the items and levels are unlocked. Bit of a bummer.

 

As for your comment regarding no used sales on DD:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Man_Gaming

And there's also Goo for Impulse, but I don't know if Stardock ever implemented it or if it was mostly concept.

[jayc4life]

That Capcom one really sucks. I mean, Jesus... imagine if Pokemon ever implemented that. Nintendo'd have a mutiny of gamers on their hands.

 

With the economy the way it is though, and not exactly rivers of cash flowing abundantly, the used game market's more important than ever, because it gives gamers back the money they need to invest in new games. Sure, publishers will see absolutely zilch from the used sales (barring maybe the couple of quid the Online Pass (if any) costs) but if by trading in, gamers are able to get new games instead of passing on ones that maybe they couldn't afford before trading in was even an option, publishers should perhaps think twice about their full-scale war over used sales.

 

Do you think the boatbuilders are sharking Stan for selling used traded-in boats? Probably not, if it means people can use the trade-in to buy an all new ship. Especially if he's as enthusiastic as this when making his pitches.

 

[Yantelope]

I think the difference between used cars and used games is that the used game usually is every bit as good as a new one.

 

Still, it's all a semantic argument which makes me angry. They say "Used games are robbing us of revenue that we've earned". The truth is more, "We could make so much more money than we used to without doing any more work by taking away people's ability to sell games." That's the heart of what pisses me off so much. The developers whine and moan like they're being abused. The way they compare used game sales to piracy is just sickening. Here's an idea: make a game that's good enough that people keep it.

[deanb]

but if by trading in, gamers are able to get new games instead of passing on ones that maybe they couldn't afford before trading in was even an option, publishers should perhaps think twice about their full-scale war over used sales.

 

This particular reasoning pisses me off a bit because it always assume that the cash strapped individual is buying the games new. If they're cash strapped to be trading in in the first place, then the chances are they'll be saving more money and buying used too.

[Yantelope]

Yeah, usually when you're a trader you don't mind buying used because you're just going to trade it back anyway. I suppose the exception would be if you're buying games at launch.

[jayc4life]

Yeah, that kinda logic makes more sense too. I'm usually a "buy at launch" person anyway, so I rarely ever buy used if I can help it. I haven't traded in a game since I traded in Far Cry 2 and Infamous towards the end of last year. The amount you get back from them just isn't worth it, and I kinda want a good gaming library that I want to look back on, and be able to play whenever I want, as opposed to looking for a good game and thinking "Oh, I traded it in. Drat.".

 

It's still very much a double edged sword, no matter which way we look at it, we're always going to be wrong, and there's always going to be some way the system will shaft us.

[CorgiShinobi]

I think we've gone over this Yant, but used game sales are not exactly a pleasant exercise of the industry. Maybe there's not much room to complain about used sales, but I would still say there is something to complain about.

 

Personally, I don't trade-in as much as I use to because I know I'll feel regret because I eventually do want to go back to those games. The only time I do trade-in is when I know I won't be playing a game because I have something to replace it, i.e. my PS3 version of Extraction. The other reason is how industrialized the trading-in process is at places like GameStop. I try to actually sell my games first, but when I know that time isn't on my side, I succumb to trade-in rates.

 

That copy of Extraction I traded-in? I got $9.00, and that's with the "50% extra value" promotion that week.

 

I honestly don't know who falls into the "trader" category anymore because of how one-sided it is. It's like, if someone only wants to play current release titles momentarily, then there's GameFly. Buying something new or used that's recently launched will cause you to lose money when you trade-in. I mean, it's gotta be a form of self-abuse to basically hand over (on average) $30 to GameStop each procedure.

[RockyRan]

So EA has gone ahead and shut down more multiplayer servers:

 

http://www.joystiq.com/2011/07/14/next-round-of-ea-server-culling-includes-army-of-two-battlefiel/

 

Does anyone else think that this...erm..."tradition" won't be stopped despite the Project 10 Dollar thing? I mean it IS EA. They've had no qualms about having their cake and eating too at the expense of the consumer.

[Yantelope]

Yeah, shutting down the servers and disallowing roster updates for sports games just to push people to upgrade every year bugs me but I suppose there's not much that can be done about that. I did however realize that roster updates don't bother me as much as they used to. Personally, what bothers me much more is the NFL monopoly madden has. I hope that gets broken up.

[WTF]

While on topic, Ubisoft is implementing the same via it's existing Uplay service starting with the Driver game coming up in September.