What's your stance on alternative downloads/DRM on game licences you own?

• 

  fishball on 16/10/2019 - 00:17

  I used to be all like REEEEEEE Denuvo REEEEEE but nowadays I have minimal time so as long as the game doesn't cause me undue grief trying to play it due to DRM I will just play it.

  Most games I wait till they're half price or more before I buy so by then the reviews and patches are in. Usually I avoid the flaming piles of trash that way.

  In the off chance I am unlucky and buy something that has really bad in your face DRM I will just refund on Steam.

  My main platform is… you guessed it. Steam. I have UPlay with around 10 games and Origin with like < 5.

  Personally if I didn't have 1000+ games on Steam I would just use the MS XBOX Gamepass or whatever. A few bucks a month and you get amazing games. Play them and move on. It's great that you can say you 'own' 1000+ games on Steam but lets face it I'm never gonna play most of em a second time, if once at all.

  Onto the actual question you asked though, I don't really pirate games anymore. I can. I did. Not anymore though, barely have time to play my legit paid for games. If you block your game through exclusives or DRM I'm just going to never play it. I've got nothing against people that want to pirate tho. As for some of the older stuff like SNES or Sega roms, I think emulators are fine. When the games are like 20+ years old and the platform is all but dead you might as well let it be free in the public so other people can enjoy.

  • 

    Switchblade88 on 16/10/2019 - 10:44

    I honestly used to pirate a little bit (rather hard when growing up on dialup!!) but an inexperienced teen with no money on Windows 2000 is a long throw from my current standing.

    I think the more I saw the background of how games are made, the actual people and stories and struggles of devs making a living from something I thoroughly enjoy playing, really helps set your conscience that paying for games is actually a great thing to do. Not to mention the absolute bargains that Humble Store, Steam Sales (and free giveaways) do to grow my collection - as well as actually having some disposable income!

• 

  trustnoone on 16/10/2019 - 01:06

  I pay for most of my games and usually I don't have much issue with DRM, but theres always the few that does something silly that ruins it, games that utilise some weird server thats been taken down years ago meaning you need some bypass, or always online games that kick you out even though you're playing single player just because your internet went down, things like this just makes me feel like the company is being a dick. But the museum one is a good example because while I may have no issue now, its always the ones many years later when they've taken down x system or service and now a game you've paid for is not accessible.

  I also hate having to use multiple launcher, buying from steam only for me to now need to download the ubisoft one just to play the game is annoying, I typically buy from GOG when i can also.

  My biggest issue though is 'digital games' my understanding is you don't "own" the game, just rights to play it, as such if you're banned/removed or anything with your account, you lose all the games you've paid for, especially when they're the same price with physical editions. Its largely due to this I prefer physical releases over digital, but I feel online services are quickly becoming future view.

  • 

    orangetrain on 16/10/2019 - 08:30

    It's called one-time payment lease. Not sure about Australia but in USA it's illegal to break DRM. So its an one time payment for lease to a certain media.

    I agree, false advertising but everyone does it. Imagine if ACCC said that's not allowed unless there's no DRM. Only GOG allows ownership.

  • 

    Switchblade88 on 16/10/2019 - 10:37

    you don't "own" the game, just rights to play it

    I think that's the crux of my post. If you have paid for the rights to play your game, then I don't see any issue with playing said game in any manner or format or device that you possess. Hence if, say, your Steam account was shut down by Valve, you should have enough legal standing to escalate the issue all the way up the courts to regain your ability to play the games you have the rights to. Of course, the legal fees/time etc is unviable to actually do, but the principle would/should stand in court.

    Its largely due to this I prefer physical releases over digital.

    Discs are a false dichotomy though. In reality, you have the data and licence on the same media (instead of being split like a Steam account and your HDD copy of data). That means if you lose the rights to play the game - e.g. Sony revokes a game worldwide and blocks access via a PS4 update - then you are back in the same situation as a digital game. The assumption is that because a company HASN'T blocked a disc game, that they CAN'T - which isn't necessarily true like it used to be with older offline consoles.

• 

  HardlyCharly on 16/10/2019 - 01:17

  +1

  I do buy the games (never on release, I don't want to play an incomplete game so I always wait for all DLC to be out, generally a year later and by then it's half the launch price), but use a pirated version to actually play them anyway because no DRM, no launcher, much smaller sizes (important), and I don't use online features. Best of both worlds for me. I'm also a Humble Monthly subscriber.

• 

  p1 ama on 16/10/2019 - 01:56

  I'd like to know opinions and feedback on what you think (and how you actually act, if different) in relation to games that you have rightfully paid for, and how strictly you follow the DRM requirements for your games. The recent furore regarding legacy DooM games and always-online accounts has me curious.

  I don't have a strict opinion on this topic, but I think we need to be consistent with our views. We have to make a decision on whether people should be allowed to profit from creating software. I'm generally an advocate for "free software", but am not religious about it - there are certain applications where that model works (e.g. operating systems, most corporate software…etc.). It will never work for games because the vast majority of consumers of games are individuals, not corporations.

  If we agree that people need to make profits in order to continue producing games and that developers have the right to make this profit, then we cannot be against DRM. The reason why DRM exists is because people pirate and without DRM, people will pirate even more. That's just the nature of the world in which we live. You might not be a threat, but you still have to go through airport security; you might not drink, but you might be pulled over for a RBT…etc.

  For example, do you always adhere to mandatory DRM where it is clearly not in your interests, nor against the law, to bypass it?

  I think it's usually pretty clear whether you're doing the "right thing" or not, very easy to determine whether something is "in the spirit" of morality or not.

  Do you think it is against the spirit of the law to acquire a PC/emulator copy of a game, where there is no viable way to play that old/legacy game anymore? Would this also extend to modern games like GTA V that are actively available to purchase on both systems?

  Old/legacy games, I don't have any moral issue. E.g. Nintendo does not sell a copy of Super Mario 64.

  Games that are currently sold, clearly there is a moral issue. If I've bought the game, I would be fine with it morally.

  I personally prefer DRM-free sources like GOG, but if I'm locked into a launcher like UPlay or Origin then I personally have no issues acquiring & using DRM removal tools (or downloading a copy of the game already DRM free).

  In my opinion, DRM is not the issue. The issue is whether you've pirated or not. If you've pirated you're in the wrong, if you have not pirated, you're good to go. You can remove DRM without being a pirate.

  Steam, likewise, also has simplicity and ease of use as the original game library, but losing access to my library of 200+ games due to legal issues or hacking or whatever is nagging in my mind; I am trying to create a library of quality experiences I can share and pass on to my kids as they grow up and I'm nervous my collection may get lost or revoked after I'm dead - unlike say a hardcopy book collection.

  I understand your fear, but your analogy is bogus. You can lose your library of games due to hacking, yes, but you can also have someone break into your house and steal your physical goods. You can lose your collection after you die, yes, but you could also lose a physical collection in the exact same way.

  • 

    orangetrain on 16/10/2019 - 08:46

    False analogy. If they truly owned their games, they can create a backup off site.

    • 

      Switchblade88 on 16/10/2019 - 10:53

      Interesting point regarding backups - that's one of the clearest benefits of Steam in that if my computer is utterly destroyed by a housefire, I have not lost my licences. I might be forced to trust Steam to ensure my account is 'backed up' and safe & secure, but I can't do that with physical discs - the same housefire means the licence is destroyed along with the data.

      The other 'backup' would be receipts from payments to Steam, alongside the game's activation keys, and I can make multiple copies of this list all over the world to prove I have the rights to play these games. You don't get that peace of mind when dealing with a toddler deciding to use your Xbox discs as a frisbee…

• 

  jackinyourbox on 16/10/2019 - 08:15

  DRM has to do with piracy. Publishers attempt to deter theft by incorporating DRM techniques into their software.
  In general DRM makes games cheaper for the consumer. I have no problem with it

  • 

    Switchblade88 on 16/10/2019 - 10:22

    I'll disagree, and say that DRM makes more money for the publisher. They haven't, and don't, reduce prices on games simply because their DRM is 'working effectively' and thus pass the savings on to consumers.

    The best way to get cheap games as a consumer is simply patience. I haven't paid more than 20% of the RRP of a game for years - IsThereAnyDeal is my second favourite site after OzBargain!

    • 

      jackinyourbox on 16/10/2019 - 20:28

      DRM helps studios reach sales targets by reducing/slowing down theft. By understanding projected sales volumes, initial pricing can be set.

      Say if stealing a game was very easy for the ‘average joe’, a lot of sales would be lost at launch. launch is where the majority of sales is made.

      Waiting for large discounts usually means the game as at an organic end of life

      • 

        Switchblade88 on 16/10/2019 - 22:32

        Losses to piracy =/= projected release sales. You never convince a pirate to pay retail by enforcing DRM.

        Not only that, games that are DRM-free are are definitely not tied to lower sales - GOG & CDPR can give evidence as such. Unless you have emipirical evidence otherwise..?

• 

  Bid Sniper on 16/10/2019 - 08:50

  Im happy with Steam but DRM really pisses me off. The companies that use DRM onto of steam are idiots and just driving customers to piracy, eg ubisoft.

  Back when I use to pirate stuff, cracked games actually ran better without the DRM trash. DRM just punishes responsible consumers. There always a cracked version anyway and DRM has been proven not to work. Sell games easily, at a fair price and people will buy it.

  Micro transactions is what is ruining games these days, as soon as that see that trash, its a nope from me.

  • 

    Switchblade88 on 16/10/2019 - 10:25

    +1

    cracked games actually ran better without the DRM trash

    It's still the case, apparently - I think it might have been Hitman 2016; without Denuvo running there was something like a 5-10% increase in FPS. That's not a lot, but any more that I'd be irritated enough to do something about it.

    • 

      Bid Sniper on 16/10/2019 - 11:02

      People are jumping to Ryzen 3 and upgrading video cards for that gain.

      anti consumer measures that dont actually work, thought they would of wised up to it by now…

• 

  [Deactivated] on 16/10/2019 - 09:12

  Stopped gaming in the pioneer days (more like terminal onset) of DRM and always online.

  The absolute last straw was Diablo 3. I have stopped gaming for a while but succumbed to nostalgia.

  Always online but the server didn't cope during launch week, so many bugs I felt like I am Beta testing and a whole facet of the game that was promised but not delivered.

  If we juxtapose the gaming industry to the automotive industry, it will seem as if you don't own the keys. Whenever you want to start the car, you hope that the key jockey can find you. The car arrives with three wheels and sometime during your day, the gearbox will be stuck on 2nd.

  • 

    Bid Sniper on 16/10/2019 - 11:03

    I just wait for "Game of the year editions" by then they have fixed most of the issue, added all the DLC and dropped the price.

    Version 1 of anything is crap

    • 

      [Deactivated] on 16/10/2019 - 11:09

      It's Diablo 3.

      • 

        Bid Sniper on 16/10/2019 - 11:19

        auction house lolz

        • 

          [Deactivated] on 16/10/2019 - 11:45

          @Bid Sniper: Sigh.

          So done with anything Blizzard.

• 

  tallkid123 on 16/10/2019 - 13:59

  I'm still mostly a gamer who buys physical copies above all else. But then again, I'm more a console gamer than PC.

  I love GOG personally but it's simply for stocking up on classic PC games than their DRM-less features.