SecuROM

[nath]

By golly there's a lot of primo games coming out at the moment. And unfortunately the majority of them seem to be bundled with this shite-ware. Now clearly I've already made up my mind about it but I'm actually quite interested to see if there's any plus sides to it. I was checking various sources and saw that Red Alert 3 is out and that's before it's even released in the shops (in the UK that is). Is casual piracy ("here you go mate, have a copy of mine") really that big an issue that they need to anger so many potential customers with this awful software? It's clearly becoming more and more of an issue as you'll start to see 1 star reviews on SecurROM infected games on amazon.

So if it's consistently failing to prevent net-based piracy, is it really worth the effort? I always feel pissed off because there's a few games I'd actually like to pay for, but I won't while it has this crap too. On the other hand, I'm willing to accept that I may be in a minority and that ultimately they make more money on the units with SecuROM than without. If this is GENUINELY the case then clearly it's the thing to do, they're a business they've gotta focus on the financial side of things. However, if it's as I expect - the anti-piracy measures do next to nothing to prevent/impede pirates but do LOTS to anger paying customers, how can it still be going? Surely these companies have access to the pirate bay and can see that their attempts are futile, so at some point someone there must ask the question why bother?

Proceed with thoughts & ramblings!

 

[Wazzerphuk]

We had a lot of problems with SecureROM on FM08, so this year we dumped it and went for a one-time code based registration system. Companies are beginning to realise that their efforts to curb piracy seem to cause more problems for legitimate users than for pirates. The main problem is that these companies actually continue to think that they can better the pirates.

 

[nath]

That's the problem I have, it's insanity. The idea that you can produce a product that will beat the endless supply of talented hackers out there who are actually spurred on by the challenge! It seems like a blatant case of the software developers sticking their head in the sand and I really thought there must be more to it that I'm missing, these companies can't all be that stupid can they?

The one-time code based registration system you mention, is that like the old cd-key check? How does it stack up with repeat installs etc?

 

[chipper]

there will never be any software invented that will not be cracked even all these secuROM games will get cracked


there are no plus sides that i can think of with this sort of software all it does is piss off the consumer, and what does it actually solve? the games will still get cracked, all be it it may be a little harder to do and may be a little harder to install, but so what, hackers and crackers get off on the challenge

i think you will find that the majority of people who buy games wouldnt think about piracy and what do they get for their loyalty? nothing but hassle when trying to play the game

the people who tend to download games really dont give a shit they wont think oh that game has secuROM i best go out and buy it they will simply sit back and think meh this one wont be available for a while but regardless they will still wait for a cracked copy to appear

i dont know how to solve the problem of piracy personally i dont think they can there will always be ppl out for a free meal so to speak however im pretty sure anti piracy software isnt the answer.

 

[nath]

I read a great line from a guy who works for Stardock.

What we think people who publish games and music need to remember is this: The goal is not to eliminate piracy. The goal is to increase sales. People who are dedicated to stealing your product will steal it.

http://forums.galciv2.com/147885/page/1/#replies

 

[rynnor]

In the future games will be moving towards the fat server/thin client model - that way piracy becomes pretty much impossible by the normal routes.

 

[Furr]

Has any of these antipirate measure worked? at all! Seems to me that it takes only a couple days and its cracked....

 

[nath]

Well, despite the fact that it lost them a sale (I had it preordered) I believe Bioshock did fairly well in that it was about a week before a decent working (non-nuked) pirate version was out. I think it's feasible that that resulted in an increase in sales due to a lack of availability immediately on "the scene".

No such luck with recent releases though, they've all come out pretty quickly - RA3 was out on the 28th in the states and "out" on the 29th.

 

[Kryten]

All these people seem to forget one huge factor in piracy. (What I'm about to say is not condoning it as a practice by any means, I personally prefer to purchase software).

All you'll ever hear in media is that piracy is stealing, which is correct. You'll also hear the companies involved that they are losing millions and millions of pounds of revenue. Which is incorrect.
What they're actually saying is "if these people bought it instead, we'd lose millions and millions." Because of course, in a huge majority should someone want something but can't afford it, they'd still not buy it. They'd probably not buy it even if they could afford it, but weren't sure if they wanted it.

Point being, piracy is thieving, it is bad. But it's not as damaging to companies profits as they'd have you believe. I agree entirely with Nath and the chap from Stardock, people should concentrate on having products worth buying - and ironically I'd imagine the anti-piracy measures are more harmful to sales than piracy is.
SecuRom, Starforce etc - they all need to take a running jump.

 

[Raven]

I try to be an honest PC gamer, I buy my games these days, mostly through steam if I can. I have bought a couple of games with SecuRom. I am on my last install with a couple due to 2 PCs going up in smoke due to crap 1930s electrics and again when I built a brand new PC and lost my Vista virginity. I have downloaded copies of them from "the usual places" so its not as if I have to buy the game again. Lately though I see a massive list of games I want coupled with another list of what I actually consider as rental. When I buy a game I want to own that for life, not 2 PC crashes and an upgrade. Fuck-um, To try and save a few bob in these tight times I think I will just go ahead and get them free from the punishment of being an honest buyer of games.

 

[nath]

All you'll ever hear in media is that piracy is stealing, which is correct.

Point being, piracy is thieving

I'm sorry but I've gotta take exception to this. These companies would like you to think of it as thievery presumably because of how most people react to that. However, there is a CLEAR and fundamental difference. When I steal an Audi R8 because it gives me an erection, the car dealer no longer has that Audi R8 to sell. If someone downloads a game (even in cases where they would have bought it had they no access to piracy) they've not taken something AWAY from anyone.

I guess the line can be blurred because with an Audi R8 the expense is in production of the actual thing. When it comes to intellectual property, the expense is in the development, the cost of the box and the media probably doesn't factor in much at all. Nevertheless, I really hate those adverts "you wouldn't steal a car" as if saying it over and over makes it true. It's not the same fucking thing, and making up bullshit is not going to change that.

 

[chipper]

you have to remember tho these games do cost millions to make and those costs have to be recuperated in revenue from sales. however they do not lost millions i think piracy accounts for maybe 10% at the very most

however that been said im not paying 30 quid for a game that quite clearly isnt worth that same goes for a cd dvd etc if i watch somethin,g play something, ill go buy it, if i dont like it chances are ill ditch it within 10-15 mins and delete it.


however just a little thing id like to throw into the debate

if i bought a loaf of bread and gave a slice to each of my friends would this be classed as theft on their part? or am i simply sharing a product that I legally own? why is it ok to share some things but not others? i know there are terms and conditions etc but at the end of the day is it just all bollocks? youve bought a product its yours you should be able to do with it as you please

maybe if these developers pumped all these millions they invest in anti piracy tools into actual game development etc and made an outstanding game and simply said we know you could download this but frankly we busted our balls on it and we really would appreciate it if you bought it. people would think twice before downloading cracked copies. ive bought many games which i could have downloaded simply because i thought they were outstanding.

if they treated us like valued customers instead of thieves they would probably find there sales rise.

 

[nath]

if i bought a loaf of bread and gave a slice to each of my friends would this be classed as theft on their part? or am i simply sharing a product that I legally own? why is it ok to share some things but not others? i know there are terms and conditions etc but at the end of the day is it just all bollocks? youve bought a product its yours you should be able to do with it as you please

maybe if these developers pumped all these millions they invest in anti piracy tools into actual game development etc and made an outstanding game and simply said we know you could download this but frankly we busted our balls on it and we really would appreciate it if you bought it. people would think twice before downloading cracked copies. ive bought many games which i could have downloaded simply because i thought they were outstanding.

if they treated us like valued customers instead of thieves they would probably find there sales rise.

The issue is that you're not purchasing the concept of bread, you're purchasing a loaf. When you buy a game, you're not buying the disc/box as much as you're buying the experience. Sharing that is a fundamentally different concept to sharing your bread.

As for the good will thing, I'm with you but I question how realistic it is. I was all ready to buy Fallout 3 when I heard it was one of the few games without invasive DRM. I have no interest in the game (and even less so after watching the review on gametrailers) but I really wanted to support that. Subsequently I heard it had lots of DRM shite so sod that.

 

[rynnor]

Hmm so you dont consider nicking intellectual property as theft (which legally it clearly is) eh?

But ofc. if everyone did it there would be no software industry and no new games for you?

Perhaps you consider yourself a special case so you dont need to pay but everyone else can?

I hope you realise how un-defendable your viewpoint is - theft is theft - clear and simple.

 

[nath]

Now I didn't say that because it wasn't theft, piracy was OK - that's your assumption. My point was that it's *not* theft, because it fucking isn't, it's software piracy.


As an aside, I don't consider myself special. I've downloaded the odd game here and there but I have very little trouble sleeping at night. Quite frankly I won't be bullied in to buying a product. It's a tricky situation for the developers, I'll admit, but if tomorrow piracy was just not an option for me - that wouldn't make me suddenly buy a load of games that I would have otherwise downloaded. You can call me a liar if you like but that's just a fact (in my case). I'll buy a game when I feel it's worth the money. Currently Red Alert 3, Far Cry 2, Fallout 3 and probably a couple of others I can't think of at the mo *would* be worth it to me if they didn't have shit copy protection.

The issue is, I guess I'm different from most, if they removed copy protection from these games most pirates would carry on pirating. The thing I don't understand is that all this crap doesn't seem to deter pirates currently, so why bother pissing off potential customers?

 

[Kryten]

I'm sorry but I've gotta take exception to this. These companies would like you to think of it as thievery presumably because of how most people react to that. However, there is a CLEAR and fundamental difference. When I steal an Audi R8 because it gives me an erection, the car dealer no longer has that Audi R8 to sell. If someone downloads a game (even in cases where they would have bought it had they no access to piracy) they've not taken something AWAY from anyone.

Good point, didn't think of it like that. Either way, it's morally and legally incorrect, which would have probably been a better way of putting it

Plus of course, it's hardly surprising that someone would want to crack games in these manners - a large majority of these people are legal game owners who don't want to have to rummage through millions of discs. Or have utter shit like Securom infecting their system.

 

[rynnor]

Now I didn't say that because it wasn't theft, piracy was OK - that's your assumption. My point was that it's *not* theft, because it fucking isn't, it's software piracy.

Thats purely semantics - who are you trying to fool - us or yourself?

 

[nath]

Thats purely semantics - who are you trying to fool - us or yourself?

Oh jesus, give me a fucking break. It's not like I killed a kitten*. I've no qualms about what I do, I'm totally upfront and honest with myself, perhaps others aren't. It may be semantics, but I consider it fairly significant semantics. Stealing is clearly worse than software piracy, perhaps not by much (depending on what is stolen) but the fundamental thing that sets it apart is what makes it worse. When you steal, you take something away.



*And for the record, I'm not a massive pirate, I don't download a tremendous amount of games, I just hate the bullshit corporate ball-lick line that piracy=stealing.

 

[rynnor]

When you steal, you take something away.

Well I guess they would argue you took away a copy of their game without paying - even if its not in physical form?

I'm really not trying to upset you but I am suprised that people can compartmentalise different types of theft.

I guess I see this area as pretty black and white really?

 

[nath]

The thing is, I get the impression you feel that I consider piracy OK. All I'm saying is that I think it's not quite as bad as theft. Not by a huge amount, but I think that depends on context. For example, I bought a copy of Gears of War on the x360. When it eventually came out on the PC I fancied trying it, so I downloaded it. Had I not been able to, or the penalty for downloading was having a testicle removed I'd not have downloaded it, but I sure as fuck wouldn't have bought it. In this situation, there's no lost revenue and I've forgotten my point.

Basically, I lose no sleep over what I do, but it does piss me off that when I want to buy a game I'll know that pirating it will give me a more enjoyable experience. There's always the argument that I could buy it and just use the pirate version but something about that doesn't sit well with me. Like I said, I wanted to buy Fallout 3 despite not being tremendously interested in the game but wanted to support a big company that had showed faith in it's customers.

I guess ultimately the issue is that these companies are being too aggressive, they're trying to combat piracy but combating piracy MEANS increasing sales to those people who would have pirated their material. Aggressive techniques will never fly with me.



edit: I think we're getting a bit side-tracked here (I take full responsibility for that). I wanted this thread to be pragmatic and without any slant. I appreciate that companies need to do whatever it takes to earn the most money, if SecuROM does that for them, well that sucks but that's what's going to happen. I'm just annoyed that there's a few games I actually *want* to buy (and I'm sure I'm in the minority, someone who's downloaded stuff and subsequently wants to pay for it) but I just won't when it has that shit on it.

 

[nath]

Edit time expired, double posting ftw etc.

I also get quite pissed off that whenever there are chats with "the suits" as it were from their respective game-development companies it's simply impossible to have a straight forward no bullshit discussion with them. Their comments are always layered in company-spiel. As if people won't see through it as a total crock of shit. It's like it's a crime to admit that the software you've released is a bit of a pain, they've got to lie through their teeth saying that everything is fine, and if you're having problems you're in the minority. Everything is dandy. Don't worry about it!

There's an exception to this rule, but it's a one man development team, and he had a very straightforward discussion with his customers/potential customers. It resulted in him removing all copy-protection measures from his forthcoming games. Can't remember the guy though.

 

[Kryten]

Takes the biscuit when you have copy protection on games distributed via Steam when there's clearly no need for it. Steam in fact is very good at copy protection just in the way it works - there *are* cracks available for those games but it's a damned slight longer for those that do work.
Odd really - I bought FarCry 2 on Steam, and as a result my PC was infected with Securom. I'll probably apply some form of nasty sooner rather than later to avoid the latter going anywhere near my system.

 

[Krazeh]

Personally I think that SecuROM and it's ilk are a complete waste of time, all they do is provide software developers/publishers with misplaced confidence that their products are now safe from the evil pirates. Oh and cause difficulties for the people who have gone out and legitimately purchased the software/game in question.

It's getting to the stage now where pirates are again cracking games before they are actually released in stores. As far as I know Spore, Fallout 3, Far Cry 2, Red Alert 3 (to name a few) were all available online from torrents and the like before you could actually go into a shop and buy a copy.

I think, as has been pointed out in this thread and by Stardock, that developers/publishers spend too much time and effort trying to defeat the pirates rather than on making the best possible experience for their legitimate customers. They need to move away from this concept of "There's been X number of downloads so we've lost Y amount of real money" and accept that people who downloaded their software are unlikely to have purchased it if the download was unavailable i.e. there is no "lost" money for them to attempt to obtain from future products through the use of copy protection mechanisms.

Perhaps once they start thinking that way they'll be able to finally consider the real reasons as to why sales figures may not be as high as they'd like instead of rabidly blaming piracy for any poor perfomance. As I recall Crysis sold poorly and that was blamed on piracy, completely sidestepping the fact that the singleplayer story wasn't great, multiplayer wasn't exactly brilliant (if you could find a game) and it needed a ridiculously powerful PC to look good while running at a decent frame rate.

Oh, and on the issue of theft, software piracy is copyright infringement rather than theft.

To have commited theft you need to have dishonestly appropriated property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it. Downloading a copy of a game/movie/music/program etc can never be theft under current legislation because you are not depriving the original owner of the property, i.e. they still have the original to do with as they wish.

I do appreciate that morally it makes little difference whether it's copyright infringement or theft and that it's still wrong either way. However piracy as an issue, both it's causes and it's effects, can only be properly discussed when looking at it in terms of the actual legalities involved. Claiming it's something other than it is doesn't do anyone any favours and merely clouds the issue.

 

[Cadelin]

Hmm so you dont consider nicking intellectual property as theft (which legally it clearly is) eh?

There is a clear difference between this type of theft and the traditional definition of theft. You can call it theft if you want but you can't then use examples from actual theft to illustrate your point.

But ofc. if everyone did it there would be no software industry and no new games for you?

There are plenty of bits of software that you can legally get for free and are continually getting better. Firefox is a good example.

Perhaps you consider yourself a special case so you dont need to pay but everyone else can?

I hope you realise how un-defendable your viewpoint is - theft is theft - clear and simple.

With DRM software, certain pirated software is actually better than the legal version. In this situation what can you do but not pay?

Many software/music companies also completely ignore the benifical aspects of the ease with which their product can be copied. Software often has very little invested in advertisment behind it but free trial software and pirated versions allow many people to use it and some will go onto buy it. How many bits of software would you buy if you couldn't try it before hand and just had to rely on a few reviews?

 

[DaGaffer]

There is a clear difference between this type of theft and the traditional definition of theft. You can call it theft if you want but you can't then use examples from actual theft to illustrate your point.

That's like a bank robber justifying themselves because the bank has insurance. There's an opportunity cost created by the loss of revenue from piracy. Just because piracy isn't theft of physical goods people seem to think there's a different morality involved. There are lots of "kinds" of theft; fraud would be another. Trying to play semantic games is the last refuge of the scoundrel freetard.

There are plenty of bits of software that you can legally get for free and are continually getting better. Firefox is a good example.

No, Firefox is a bad example. The Mozilla foundation is funded mainly by big corporate backers, including the parasitic Google, and was largely developed as an anti-Microsoft alliance. Games have to be funded; and that means paid for or advertising funded. There are lots of ways to pay for games, but 'free' isn't an option.

With DRM software, certain pirated software is actually better than the legal version. In this situation what can you do but not pay?

This is the only area where you have a valid point, and even then its a weak one. Yes, there is a ridiculous situation where the quality of a pirated game can be better than a DRM'd one, but you know what, it still doesn't give you the right to pirate it. If you don't like DRM in a game, don't buy the game. You have no "right" to get the game the way you want it.

Many software/music companies also completely ignore the benifical aspects of the ease with which their product can be copied. Software often has very little invested in advertisment behind it but free trial software and pirated versions allow many people to use it and some will go onto buy it. How many bits of software would you buy if you couldn't try it before hand and just had to rely on a few reviews?

You're talking out of your arse. Games companies spend a fortune on advertising and they have a legitimate sampling model (demos), which isn't just "pinch the entire game and pay for it if you feel like it".

I'm not disagreeing that DRM implementations are poor, they clearly are, but if you don't like it, don't buy it. The only legitimate use of a pirated copy is if you've already bought the game, otherwise you're just a thief. A certain kind of thief, but nevertheless a thief.

 

[SawTooTH]

Same must apply to downloading US TV shows /movies etc, but people tend to gloss over that as piracy.

 

[DaGaffer]

Same must apply to downloading US TV shows /movies etc, but people tend to gloss over that as piracy.

Absolutely. And I have to hold my hands up to hypocrisy here, I do downloaded US tv shows (but not movies). I delude myself that I only do it because the TV companies insist on months between US and UK releases (if they release at all), which mean I'm on permanent spoiler avoidance watch, and that I'll watch them again when they come on UK TV anyway. I also know that these are all excuses and pretty much bullshit.

 

[Cadelin]

That's like a bank robber justifying themselves because the bank has insurance. There's an opportunity cost created by the loss of revenue from piracy. Just because piracy isn't theft of physical goods people seem to think there's a different morality involved. There are lots of "kinds" of theft; fraud would be another. Trying to play semantic games is the last refuge of the scoundrel freetard.

I am not playing semantics I am trying to point out the straw man argument that software companies often use.

Fraud is treated differently from bank robbery. Therefore software piracy should be treated differently from say stealing a car. Yet the advertisement I see from the software companies is: "You wouldn't steal a car..." I am not saying it isn't wrong I am simply saying it should be treated separately. And yes I do think there is a different morality involved.

No, Firefox is a bad example. The Mozilla foundation is funded mainly by big corporate backers, including the parasitic Google, and was largely developed as an anti-Microsoft alliance. Games have to be funded; and that means paid for or advertising funded. There are lots of ways to pay for games, but 'free' isn't an option.

The point I was answering was that if we all pirated software there wouldn't be any. I was simply pointing out there is software that is free for the user and still being developed.

This is the only area where you have a valid point, and even then its a weak one. Yes, there is a ridiculous situation where the quality of a pirated game can be better than a DRM'd one, but you know what, it still doesn't give you the right to pirate it. If you don't like DRM in a game, don't buy the game. You have no "right" to get the game the way you want it.

I didn't say it was right to pirate the game. I simply said it wouldn't be worth paying for a DRM version of it.

You're talking out of your arse. Games companies spend a fortune on advertising and they have a legitimate sampling model (demos), which isn't just "pinch the entire game and pay for it if you feel like it".

They don't spend a fortune when you compare games to other branded products. Once the product has been made they can produce them effectively for free so they can give out as many trial versions or free samples without it costing them. Normal products can't do that and so it costs them more to advertise.

I'm not disagreeing that DRM implementations are poor, they clearly are, but if you don't like it, don't buy it. The only legitimate use of a pirated copy is if you've already bought the game, otherwise you're just a thief. A certain kind of thief, but nevertheless a thief.

You have accused people of being thieves for downloading before knowing if they have also got a legitimate version of it. Yet now you say that its ok to steal stuff if you already have a copy?

 

[taB]

Yet now you say that its ok to steal stuff if you already have a copy?

If you already have a copy you have been granted the rights to use the game. As such it isn't theft.

 

[TdC]

use as in play/run software/etc. I'm somewhat sure they didn't mean use as in make cracked copies to give your 10.000.000 mates on the web o0