Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

This only gave grief

3 (6.1%)

Grakelin is not stupid

6 (12.2%)

Are you happier now?

1 (2%)

------ Haiku, the encore -----

17 (34.7%)

Disagreeing, Fine

0 (0%)

Why you make a fuzz 'bout it?

3 (6.1%)

Lets just be happy

19 (38.8%)

Total Members Voted: 48

[Soulwynd]

They don't teach basic essay writing in the US? Like... contrast methods? Like.. Introduction, point something in favor, something against, conclusion? I mean, common Aqizzar, that's not something to pick about.

Yes, I did defend both sides on purpose. My conclusion is they need to treat pirates as potential customers, revise production costs, price/sale rates, and stop trying to wag the dog. I can't state piracy doesn't equal a lost sale because there simply isn't data on this on games. There is some data on it on music and they point towards piracy equals more sales. But, piracy itself can't be taken as the problem they are facing, simply due to the fact that you also have no data that says every pirated game would be bought if there wasn't the piracy option.

The fact is, they don't have a significant per-unit cost, unlike physical products, they have a development cost and then got to cover it with unit sale. From my perspective, what they are doing is going against acquiring more sales.

Oh, btw, Aqizzar, I'm not anti-industry. I just think they are heading the wrong way and doing the wrong things at the moment.

[Aqizzar]

The fact is, they don't have a significant per-unit cost, unlike physical products, they have a development cost and then got to cover it with unit sale. From my perspective, what they are doing is going against acquiring more sales.

Oh, btw, Aqizzar, I'm not anti-industry. I just think they are heading the wrong way and doing the wrong things at the moment.

Very well, I'll take your word for it.  I don't understand your argument as much as I thought I did, so let me ask: When you say "what they are doing is going against acquiring more sales", do you mean anti-piracy altogether?  Or just specific forms of anti-piracy that have gained popularity among major producers?

I'm as pissed off as anybody by things like unreliable mandatory validation servers, such the ubisoft thing.  I don't really understand what "DRM" is or how it works.  I suspect a lot of anti-anti-piracy people don't either, and just assume they know that DRM is something really bad.

Believe me, I long for the days when all you needed was to hold onto the CD case for a keycode.  Or for that matter, the really old days of asking questions encoded in the manual or something.  But obviously those don't work very well.  I have thought about this before, and the only genuinely effective method of copy-protection with modern technology is off-site validation like the ubisoft thing, because you can do anything on your own computer without it ever being checked.

You may have noticed a trend there.  Off-site validation is the only theoretically solid method of anti-piracy, and the only way to solidly guarantee online validation by the user is if they connect to the Internet, say for multiplayer.  That I believe is one reason why more developers focus on multiplayer games over singleplayer attractions, because they're a lot easier to guarantee sales with.

[Sensei]

I fail to see how Morrowind was in any way more simple than Daggerfall.  It had everything Daggerfall had, and a lot more functionality.  More spell making, more meaningful (if nowhere near enough) factions and quests, actual area and quest design instead of leaving everything to random generation.  And lets not forget the best and most important part of Morrowind, the editor.

Oblivion was a trainwreck, I won't dispute, and even Fallout 3 was a step backward from Morrowind, but for a different reason.

One of the biggest things cited for Elder Scrolls games becoming less complex is a decrease in the number of skills. But a lot of it really is a good thing- for example, compressing the Long Blade and Short Blade skills into a Blade skill in Oblivion. There were also some rat-useless skills in Daggerfall. My biggest irk in Oblivion (aside from the oft rhythm-based combat) was the lack of any climbing or flying skills. Meant a lot less freedom. But like I said- I sure don't miss Thaumaturgy.

[dragnar]

I'm as pissed off as anybody by things like unreliable mandatory validation servers, such the ubisoft thing.  I don't really understand what "DRM" is or how it works.  I suspect a lot of anti-anti-piracy people don't either, and just assume they know that DRM is something really bad.

But... It is "something really bad". Being forced to maintain a continuous internet connection to play an offline game is ridiculous, however the system actually works. Has Ubisoft never heard of laptops? Or say, wanting to play games while on trips? Sure occasional validation is fine, but requiring continuous internet to play an offline game is just plain wrong.

I have thought about this before, and the only genuinely effective method of copy-protection with modern technology is off-site validation like the ubisoft thing, because you can do anything on your own computer without it ever being checked.

It isn't effective. Hackers had the DRM cracked on Assassin's creed 2 before it even came out. The pirates can keep playing indefinitely, without an internet connection, while the genuinely paying custyomers can't play their games if Ubisoft's servers go down. DRM wouldn't be too bad if it worked, but it inconveniences the paying customers(to put it lightly) and doesn't effect the pirates at all. If anything it's a fun challenge for the hackers who create the cracks. If I ever buy an Ubisoft game again I will never install it, and instead get a cracked version so I son't have to deal with it. Lots of people won't bother buying it first, so if anything DRM increases piracy.

[Cthulhu]

What I don't get is why otherwise seemingly intelligent consumers are so happy to be ripped off by gigantic corporations who make games they don't even like that much.  It just goes against all reason I can think of.  It's certainly not motivated by self interest, they're actively helping companies rip them off.  It's not motivated by any common morality.  The corps don't give a crap about them and sometimes even their own employees.  EA regularly fires entire dev teams before the game they're working on is even finished and buys up and destroys every smaller dev it can get it's hands on.  Ubisoft has ridiculously invasive DRM and constantly disapoints, and Activision is run by an unrepentant asshole who constantly talks about how he's going to screw us over next.  So what is it that makes people who seem to understand they're being ripped off so desperately defend the industry?

Because I go by a rational choice method of buying games.  If a game looks like something I'd enjoy, I buy it.  If I feel, through my nebulous and wholly subjective metrics, that I gained the game's price worth of fun, then I don't care if I was "screwed over" or "ripped off" because I gained more than I lost.

If I can tell I'm not going to enjoy a game enough to justify its price, or if problems with the game related to company shenanigans (Such as DLC, which should totally be on the poll) outweigh my enjoyment, I don't buy the game.  It's a simple and elegant system.

Borderlands, for example.  Borderlands had problems that made multiplayer virtually unplayable, and also had DLC already in the works on release.  Despite that, I greatly enjoyed the time I spent playing it, and I know that I can come back to it any time for more.  My enjoyment outweighed the cost and the company shenanigans, so I don't care if they pulled shenanigans in the first place.

[cowofdoom78963]

Information is bad buisiness. It goes against the principles of economy. Dont go blaming pirates for doing what people do.

You can follow whatever "morals" you want but all you are doing is throwing pearls before swine.

[Grakelin]

To throw in my two cents without participating too actively in this debate, I'd just like to say that I've pirated AND purchased games. No amount of copy protection in the world has ever prevented me from clicking an active download link to a game within an hour of beginning a search. Despite this piracy, I've always supported games that I really like. I wouldn't dream of taking back the two hundred or so dollars I spent buying multiple copies of the Warcraft 3 Battlechest, or the $70 altogether I spent on Civilization IV and its expansions, or the $9.99 I spent on XCOM. I would dream of taking back the $60 I spent on Fallout 3, though. In a heartbeat. Sometimes I consider selling my copy just so I can steal it off the internet, but that's just my rage speaking.

I've spent a sizable portion of my lifetime income on video games I could have easily pirated. So it's a bit offensive to me that some companies choose to go in a direction where their mistrust for me is so great that it's easier for me to pirate.

Quite literally. If I want to Play AC2 without an internet connection, guess what the most viable way of doing so is? What a wonderfully poor marketing plan.

[Ioric Kittencuddler]

Then allow me to explain.  I am not defending anyone.  I am attacking the anti-industry arguments (specifically yours and Soulwynd's) as oversimplifications and specious quibbles of taste.  Whether or not major game-making companies are trending toward (what you would call) simpler gameplay or predatory business practices is irrelevant to the hollow and egocentric way you define your criticisms.  That is what I'm arguing about.

As for the piracy thing and my "defense" thereof: Welcome to the real world, where businesses exist to make money selling a product, and will take whatever measures they think are effective to do so that the law allows.  Sometimes they make bad decisions, sometimes they over- or under- react.  Whaddaya know, they're run by humans.  I'm not arguing in defense of anybody, I'm explain what things are and the way the situation works.  There is an objective reality to how the gaming-piracy (and software piracy in general) works.  So often, especially here, I see it described in a way that has very little to do with the real world, and the "solutions" proposed to the issue, when at all, are usually ridiculous.

I don't know why I subject myself to this, but I have an urgent need to set the facts straight and encourage, rudely if need be, rational observation and understanding of issues.  And hey, I can be as wrong as anyone.  But don't you dare try to conflate me with the nonspecific evils of your perceived adversaries.

You aren't teaching me anything except that you refuse to even attempt to comprehend that someone might have the same knowledge as you but feel differently about it.  I'm well aware of how the industry works.  How the hell do you think I keep complaining about it?  Get over yourself.

[Soulwynd]

Very well, I'll take your word for it.  I don't understand your argument as much as I thought I did, so let me ask: When you say "what they are doing is going against acquiring more sales", do you mean anti-piracy altogether?  Or just specific forms of anti-piracy that have gained popularity among major producers?

Well, I am against copyright/patent/IP altogether, for more reasons than I'm awake enough to explain. But if you manage to google-fu past the copyright crazed people, you can find some insightful text from economists and others on how detrimental copyright/etc is.

Anti-piracy altogether yes, for most media-based content. That's treating your legit consumer as a thief and it doesn't stop piracy at all. On games, you had the whole starforce fiasco a few years ago and today you have ubisoft's new drm. It doesn't work. At best, and this is a huge point, it makes resale more difficult. Someone posted an interesting interview with a game dev who went cursing and yelling at the guy about resale market and how he didn't get his cut from the resale. That's a stupid and unrealistic behavior and I'm starting to believe that DRM in general is more geared towards stopping resale, as it doesn't work at all against piracy. And nope, not even Assassins Creed 2 drm worked, it was cracked and pirated before release.

Instead of DRM, they could offer:
-Online features, such as ranking, new missions, new items, etc
-Better multiplayer (altho this doesn't really stop piracy, it sure helps with sales)
-Discounts for people who register their game online (Oh, so you own 2 of our games, here, 10% discount for the next time you buy one of our games!)
-Shareware/Trial instead of demos (2 days of full gametime so you can test the game instead of a biased demo. It's the reason a lot of people I know go for warez instead of demos to try a game)
-Provide more & better free modding tools (like the source engine)

There are more ideas that could work, but I'm too sleepy to think right now.

But here's what we get, things like:
-Only install 3 times, if things go wrong you gotta beg for your uninstall
-Can only register once and can't transfer account
-Can only play online for a single player game
-Strange things installing in your computer without your consent

They can fight piracy without being jackasses. Fight piracy by offering a better product.

As for DRM, there are several types. It escalated roughly in this order for pc games, both chronologically and in intensity:
-Codes from manuals (started with this bastard, pretty much)
-Product key
-CD must be in the drive to play
-Check for fake CDs
-Check for emulated drives
-Lock the dvd/cd drivers
-Install a virus that constantly checks to see if the game isn't cracked and the cd is in place (aka starforce)
-Number of installs checked next time you're online
-Need to be online to install
-Account based online distribution (steam, d2d, etc)
-Can only play single-player games online (latest)

Some were more effective than others at their time, but nowadays, none are effective. Even with online gameplay, people hack servers, create emulators for mmos, go on and even make a better game.

To throw in my two cents without participating too actively in this debate

I've bought most of the x-com games more times than I can remember. I have 3 boxes of the first x-com. Two for pc, one for the psx. Plus I recently bought it from steam.

And note. I already had the game installed when I bought it. But that's just me being fanboish.

[Grakelin]

I still agree with Aqizzar's on topic points, however. Games aren't necessarily becoming inferior to games from the past just because they look better. I stand by my previous assertion that we're just not used to hearing about bad games from the past, because people only talk about the gems.

If I want to go to the sarcastic route:

I agree with you, man. Civ IV was such a step down from the original Civ. And damn, Mount & Blade was all glitz and glamour. And Company of Heroes? Give me an RTS with some real strategy and complex tactics, like Age of Empires or something.

[Sir Pseudonymous]

Oblivion was a trainwreck, I won't dispute, and even Fallout 3 was a step backward from Morrowind, but for a different reason.

Fallout 3 was a good FPS with RPG elements thrown in. Morrowind was a good RPG with FPS elements thrown in. Oblivion did neither very well. Oblivion was a good game, just not when compared to Morrowind. Both Fallout 3 and Morrowind were great games, but they're so different it doesn't make sense to compare the two.

One of the biggest things cited for Elder Scrolls games becoming less complex is a decrease in the number of skills. But a lot of it really is a good thing- for example, compressing the Long Blade and Short Blade skills into a Blade skill in Oblivion. There were also some rat-useless skills in Daggerfall. My biggest irk in Oblivion (aside from the oft rhythm-based combat) was the lack of any climbing or flying skills. Meant a lot less freedom. But like I said- I sure don't miss Thaumaturgy.

YES, wielding a claymore is identical to wielding a dagger! Clearly if you can do one you can do both! That scrawny knife fighter should be able to swing the giant fucking sword that's longer than he is tall perfectly! And who ever heard of a spear anyways?

Daggerfall, however, was a buggy clusterfuck of bad design. Though, say, climbing would have been an interesting feature in Morrowind, the linguistic skills made shit for sense, as did most of the character creation options

You can thank the 360 for the lack of flying though, since it couldn't handle open cities. >:O

[Dwarf]

Oh well...
Games had, have and will always have some kind of Complexity/Playability conflict.
Although I'm on the far complexity side (Hence, DF and similar games), some will not even dream about touching something like Civ (moderately complex) and will happily carry on playing what are arcade games with nice graphics.
I tolerate that but it's something I will never understand.

[Nivim]

*Claps slowly from a chair in back.* This thread was highly entertaining, however I ran into very little solid information. I can be very sure what's inflamed a lot of people who play games though.

[Sir Pseudonymous]

Oh well...
Games had, have and will always have some kind of Complexity/Playability conflict.
Although I'm on the far complexity side (Hence, DF and similar games), some will not even dream about touching something like Civ (moderately complex) and will happily carry on playing what are arcade games with nice graphics.
I tolerate that but it's something I will never understand.

The only time complexity conflicts with playability is when it's poorly thought out complexity. Mostly because the more complex you make something, the harder it is to balance it right so it's not just a random clusterfuck (see: Daggerfall). Dorf Fort is actually pretty good about that; it's complex, but most of that just kind of deals with itself, you do a handful of things and it plays itself, more or less. Its inaccessibility comes from the idiosyncratic ASCII/static tiles, lack of in game instruction, and relative unintuitiveness of controls. Even its interface is very efficient once you know what to do with it.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Actually, in my experience Daggerfall was a clusterfuck in just the bugginess. Everything else about it was more or less "just right". Fun bugs interspersed with bad ones (climbing up a city wall? Alright. Climbing up a city wall while riding a horse that tows a wagon?...), gigantic flattish world with semi-random dungeons, fast travel anywhere - really, the game as a whole was rather good. Now that processor power is starting to go up, I think people at Bethesda could take a risk and produce a game with relatively dated (technologically) graphics, while boosting the game world to Daggerfall proportions. I mean really, look at DF. An entire world generated from one seed will stay the same on each revisit, down to individual trees and shrubs. Apply that to your own world, and you get an easy way of populating many thousands of square miles of land without the need to place features and creatures by hand. Dungeons could be semi-random again, only cities would need any sort of design attention. I think everyone would agree that with today's technology, it's possible to remake Daggerfall on the same scale and with better visuals and gameplay, without overtaxing hardware. Other than the unwillingness to undertake such a daring project, I see no reason not to attempt it, as it would clearly become the greatest game in the series.