Wednesday, 25 January 2012

DRM "costs money and makes you lose money"


So says Paradox CEO Fred Wester in an interview with Gamespy, it's actually a good read. I would totally agree with this. If you take a look at damn near every game with DRM, then look at torrent sites a number of days after you will usually fine a patch to bypass the DRM in question. At best you will stop your game getting pirated for the first couple weeks or so while a crack is being worked on. 

I have always seen games as a long term investment, which is of the reasons I don't like games such as Call of Duty, they focus on sales until the next rendition of the game comes out which is when they generally stop supporting the game. Good games should be supported for years to come, look at the likes of Counter Strike, Team Fortress and Left 4 Dead those games are what about 5 years old? and they still get constant updates from the developers which is why to this day people still buy these games. Anyway getting back to my point, If a game is a long term investment and DRM is a short term solution, surely you would be better off investing the money spent on DRM (which I'm guessing isn't that cheap, especially if you use a third party solution, I really don't know how much these things cost tbh) on developing the game further. At the end of the day if release good quality goods at a reasonable price people will buy it. Like it or not piracy isn't going any where and pirates will always find a loophole in whatever system you put in place. So focus more on putting out better quality things than worrying about keeping pirates at bay (see what I did there) for a couple of weeks.

If DRM intrudes on my gaming I'm not going to play those games (I'm looking at you Ubisoft). If it comes out in the form of say Steam for example, which actually benefits me (cheap games, library of my games to download at my leisure, social features) I'm okay with it. DRM isn't necessarily a bad thing but you have to make it worth putting up with.