Why online console gaming is ruining PC gaming.

[Crispy Dave]

Online console gaming is ruining PC gaming for many reasons people.

1) DLC
Back in the day new maps and other DLC was all free. Why should we all of a sudden have to pay so much money for 4 maps? Look at gears of war, I believe if you purchase all the map packs for it it comes to $40. $40 for a few damn maps! It's gears of War the maps don't even really matter! the game still plays the same. We still have some good games out there like Team Fortress 2 that offers free updates often. The only exception to this is full on expansions which I have no problem paying for, but these company's feel that a short 2 hour ad-on is worth $30. All this goes back to xbox live. Nobody ever payed for maps before xbox live came out with all this moneymonging.

2)Dedicated Server support.
This one just recently came to my attention when I found out that Modern Warfare 2 would have no Dedicated Server support (http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/board.pl?action=viewstory&threadid=103314)(sign that petition btw). Multiplayer just runs better with dedicated servers. It makes custom maps and mods easier to show others, as well as just running better. I have the internet speeds to host a server even. An example of why random host connections are bad is again, Gears of War. Have you seen the host advantage? It's insane! I at lease hope it selects the host based on upload speeds not just randomly.


3) DRM
DRM is also being pushed because of this. Developers see that games can't be as easily pirated on consoles and sell games on them as a form of DRM. It also is used as encouragement for games that are released on the PC to have heavier DRM.


There are many more reasons and all can be discussed in this thread.

[Pie Guy]

So you're saying that all consoles must be destroyed? Or that consoles should be more like computers?

[Dihan]

DLC? I'm pretty sure PCs started it all off with expansion packs. The Sims much?

[Closet_Skeleton]

I don't know about online gaming but I have a theory that the only reason FEAR 2 doesn't having leaning when FEAR 1 did is because there wasn't a decent button for leaning on the XBOX 360 controller. The console may also be to blame for why information and reflex boosters aren't playthrough specific and dissapear forever from later playthroughs once you pick them up.

But that's the only new game I've bought recently and I bought that over half a year ago.


DLC? I'm pretty sure PCs started it all off with expansion packs. The Sims much?

Baring the Sims, decent expansion packs had entire campaigns, not just 4 new maps or outfits.

[Gamerlord]

PC gaming is not without its sins, though, and I ONLY play PC games(Thinking about getting a console though) .

Graphic cards much? It is starting to get ridiculous, none of the games released this year work on my computer, and I CANNOT get a graphics card because I don't really have any memory left, and a new computer with a decent graphics card cost FAR more then ANY console.

[Myatar_Panwar]

Yeah I learned about that MW2 server stuff yesterday. Pretty disappointing, as I was planning to buy it on PC. Might just go for the 360 version now.

But your DLC rant is a little harsh. What 2-hour add-on did you pay $30 for? The only $30 add-on I can think of is (or was) The Shivering Isles, and I got way more than 2 hours out of that.

Please don't exaggerate these numbers to try and make your point.

[leafman]

PC gaming is not without its sins, though, and I ONLY play PC games(Thinking about getting a console though) .

Graphic cards much? It is starting to get ridiculous, none of the games released this year work on my computer, and I CANNOT get a graphics card because I don't really have any memory left, and a new computer with a decent graphics card cost FAR more then ANY console.

I have to agree with the above. I used to play on the PC almost exclusively, but it seems that every year new and better PC hardware comes out and any games released after the new hardware, are designed to only run on that new hardware.
For and experiment try playing a game that was recently released on a two year old computer that didn't have cutting edge hardware when it was built.

You get more for your money from consoles. The 360 is over two years old already, it can still play new games as well as it did when it came out and there aren't any rumors (that I've heard) of a new system to replace it.

What exactly is wrong with DRM's though? Are you mad you can't burn a copy for all your buddies or just mad that is promotes exclusivity of games on consoles verse PC?

[Zincorium]

Graphic cards much? It is starting to get ridiculous, none of the games released this year work on my computer, and I CANNOT get a graphics card because I don't really have any memory left, and a new computer with a decent graphics card cost FAR more then ANY console.

Your problem is illogical[/spock].

Graphics cards come with memory installed on the card, and usually it's higher quality (GDDR4 or 5) if lower quantity than you can install on the computer. The only time graphics use your system memory instead is if it's an onboard chipset.

Admittedly, there's still issues with your CPU acting as a bottleneck, but if you're using socket 775/AM2 there are a bunch of fairly cheap processors out there you can overclock to perfectly acceptable levels. And RAM is pretty cheap too, even high-speed DDR3.

Now, graphics cards can be overly expensive for the most part, but since the Crysis Debacle I can't see a justification for the high end premium cards, you really lose very little with a well chosen budget card.

[Oslecamo]

Graphic cards much? It is starting to get ridiculous, none of the games released this year work on my computer, and I CANNOT get a graphics card because I don't really have any memory left, and a new computer with a decent graphics card cost FAR more then ANY console.

Well, sony tried to solve this by making their console almost as expensive as a good computer, but we all know how this wall-street strategy (aparently they both believe raising the price of a product is enough to automaticaly make it better) turned out.:smalltongue:

On a more serious tone, smart companies seem to be giving their games the possibility on running in lower specs, like RA3 did, so you don't need a pimped out computer to run them. But not all of them do so.

[MickJay]

Problem with DRMs is, in general, that you're not such much buying stuff as renting it for a limited number of uses/for a limited time (until you change your equipment). Why was Spore among the most widely pirated game in the recent years? Because people didn't want to pay full price for a game they'd be able to install 3 times only. By the time someone started to think about the stupidity of this solution, the damage was already done.

With DRM music, you're basically purchasing the right to play it on a particular device, and when that device breaks or becomes obsolete, you have to buy the same music again if you want to keep listening to it. It so happens that I'm not a big fan of paying multiple times for the same product or service, and this is what DRM, in the long run, amounts to. If I buy a book, nobody's going to tell me that I can read it only at home, in my chair next to the window in the living room (and if I don't, I should pay for it again or I'll be breaking the law), why should it be different with other products?

Also, it used to be a fairly common practice that people would make spare copies of the games they particularly enjoyed, for their own use, in case the original disks were damaged or exploded in the drive (happened to me a couple of times). A few of the really old games I have I can now run only from the copies, because orignal disks did become, eventually, unusable (wear and tear, damage, decay).

[Fiendish_Dire_Moose]

What exactly is wrong with DRM's though? Are you mad you can't burn a copy for all your buddies or just mad that is promotes exclusivity of games on consoles verse PC?

DRM tends to hurt more than it helps, and it hurts the people who get the game legitimately. The only example I can think of to the contrary is Batman.
Seriously, look up some stuff on DRM, it hurts. I'm sure you know that Spore only lets you download three times, not to mention needing to be online just to play single player. And yes, I've had to download one game to my computer multiple times. Thankfully Alice just has a CD key.
DRM=bad. However, that's not consoles hurting us. That's gamers who pirate making developers mad and hurting the gamers who don't. Not a console issue, a consumer issue. However, on the flip side, I'm tired of paying 60 bucks for 4 hours of gameplay in Campaign mode, so developers could work harder and take more risks.

[Avilan the Grey]

Online console gaming is ruining PC gaming for many reasons people.

1) DLC
(snip)

2)Dedicated Server support.
(snip)


3) DRM
(snip)


What exactly does this have to do with consoles or PCs? Seriously, I see no connection between headline and main text / argument here. None of the issues above have anything to do with "Consoles ruining PC gaming".

Now if you would replace all arguments above with the "dumbing down" argument, then maybe you would have a point.
Oh and about DLC? Only really really dumb people give their work away for free.



Graphic cards much? It is starting to get ridiculous, none of the games released this year work on my computer, and I CANNOT get a graphics card because I don't really have any memory left, and a new computer with a decent graphics card cost FAR more then ANY console.

Funny I have the exact opposite experience. Due to the financial crisis and the popularity of "lightweight" Laptops, all new games this year (so far) can run on my medium-powerful laptop. Your argument was a really good one, that I ranted about alot too a few years ago. In fact, I think the craze to assume people bought new systems every 8-16 months peaked with Crysis and has all but disappeared now.

[Fiendish_Dire_Moose]

Oh and about DLC? Only really really dumb people give their work away for free. Not a big fan of Valve are you?

[Avilan the Grey]

Not a big fan of Valve are you?

I like them, although I admit I have not played a single Valve game since HL2 (no Episodes).

[Jahkaivah]

For and experiment try playing a game that was recently released on a two year old computer that didn't have cutting edge hardware when it was built.


You (http://store.steampowered.com/app/40709/) may (http://store.steampowered.com/app/18407/) want (http://store.steampowered.com/app/32160/) to (http://store.steampowered.com/app/40200/) narrow (http://store.steampowered.com/app/32410/) that (http://store.steampowered.com/app/35070/) down. (http://store.steampowered.com/app/3650/) :smalltongue:

So to narrow that down, the Arkham Asylum demo, a recently released game which demands the hardware of modern consoles works fine on the PC which I got around the time Oblivion came out :smallwink:

[chiasaur11]

I like them, although I admit I have not played a single Valve game since HL2 (no Episodes).

You are missing out.

On so much.

Also: They don't just give away new levels, they tweak the games they've already released not just for bugs, but to fix weak design sections. Not bad.

[Ikialev]

You (http://store.steampowered.com/app/40709/) may (http://store.steampowered.com/app/18407/) want (http://store.steampowered.com/app/32160/) to (http://store.steampowered.com/app/40200/) narrow (http://store.steampowered.com/app/32410/) that (http://store.steampowered.com/app/35070/) down. (http://store.steampowered.com/app/3650/) :smalltongue:

Those are not real games.

[Avilan the Grey]

For and experiment try playing a game that was recently released on a two year old computer that didn't have cutting edge hardware when it was built.

As stated in my other post, I think it is getting better. The new games I have looked at this year all has, compared to new games released two years ago, far lower demands.
What I mean is that almost every game two years ago demanded things that a (at the time) new mid-range computer would struggle with. This year, new games have demands that can be easily met by new mid-range computers.



Those are not real games.

...Because?

[Jahkaivah]

Yeah, Valve are such idiots for making sales. (http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/57308)


Those are not real demanding games.

Very good.

Now read the second part of my post. :smallbiggrin:

(And for what it's worth Machinerium and Lucidity look kinda cool.)

[kamikasei]

Developers see that games can't be as easily pirated on consoles and sell games on them as a form of DRM.

I'm afraid I can't make any sense of this statement. I can only assume you're using the term "DRM" in a new and exciting way known only to yourself.

[Jahkaivah]

I'm afraid I can't make any sense of this statement. I can only assume you're using the term "DRM" in a new and exciting way known only to yourself.

Pretty sure he means:

If DRM means method of reducing Piracy.

Releasing only on consoles, means no PC to pirate on, means Only Consoles to pirate on, means harder to pirate, means Method of Reducing Pirate, means DRM

Don't think that's quite what DRM actually means, but you can tell what he means... means....

means means means

*explodes*

[Myatar_Panwar]

What exactly does this have to do with consoles or PCs? Seriously, I see no connection between headline and main text / argument here. None of the issues above have anything to do with "Consoles ruining PC gaming".

In his third point about DRM he explicitly states why the PC is getting the shaft here because of consoles.

And the stuff about not having dedicated server support: While playing a game on the PC like TF2 or counterstrike, you get a list of servers hosted by dudes, which you can filter for things like latency, player count, etc. You can have favorite servers and servers you'd rather not see.

Consoles have matchmaking. MW2 is getting console matchmaking.

[Cubey]

Wow, a "consoles are ruining the PC" thread. I surely didn't see anything like this before.

[Artanis]

DRM for computer games isn't exactly a new issue. Starforce vs. GalCiv 2, anyone? :smalltongue:

[kamikasei]

If DRM means method of reducing Piracy.
...
Don't think that's quite what DRM actually means

Just so. Words should generally be used for what they actually mean.

[MickJay]

Wow, a "consoles are ruining the PC" thread. I surely didn't see anything like this before.

Well, nobody raised the issue of gradual yet constant reducing of the amount of thinking needed to complete a game, non-existence of decent plots or putting 95% of the budget into graphics and special effects instead of developing of the game itself yet, that doesn't happen often :smalltongue:

[Cubey]

Well, nobody raised the issue of gradual yet constant reducing of the amount of thinking needed to complete a game, non-existence of decent plots or putting 95% of the budget into graphics and special effects instead of developing of the game itself yet, that doesn't happen often :smalltongue:

And it's good they didn't, because it's neither related to how consoles and PCs interact with each other nor particularly true, except for some brainless genres that were no less brainless 5/10/15 years ago.

[valadil]

3) DRM
DRM is also being pushed because of this. Developers see that games can't be as easily pirated on consoles and sell games on them as a form of DRM. It also is used as encouragement for games that are released on the PC to have heavier DRM.


DRM has always been around in some form or another. It has nothing to do with console games. Nobody wants their content to be stolen.

One of the copy control schemes I remember from way back when was the manual. Quite a few games wouldn't start unless you entered the xth word from the yth page of the manual. On more than one occasion I memorized one or two words from the manual and started and restarted the game until that word came up.

[leafman]

In my defense, I must add that I gave up trying to game on a PC a couple years ago and I generally prefer games that are more advanced than "match 3 of the same color/shape" :smallsigh:

[Jahkaivah]

In my defense, I must add that I gave up trying to game on a PC a couple years ago and I generally prefer games that are more advanced than "match 3 of the same color/shape" :smallsigh:

Ok... is there something about the first part of that post that makes the second part invisible or something? :smallconfused:
I only dressed that Strawman up for my own amusement :smalltongue:

Here it is again:


So to narrow that down, the Arkham Asylum demo, a recently released game which demands the hardware of modern consoles works fine on the PC which I got around the time Oblivion came out :smallwink:

[KBF]

Two cents:

1) DRM as argued against in this thread is not convincing, and DRM itself isn't a bad thing. So capping off the argument that is already lacking any examples or real points with DRM = bad is just showing a herd mentality on the subject. That being said, my favorite method of 'DRM' (in the looser sense) is Steam. Because it serves a very useful purpose. I can download games multiple times on any computer with no issues. Whereas my disks tend to get broken by my baby brother near instantly, and when my hard drive fails (like just last week) I lose all my Direct Download game files. And since only one person can be playing a game on an account at a time, I'd have to say it reduces file sharing to an acceptable level.

2) DLC, though I love Valve for updating their games so often for free, is not a bad thing. In fact, I'd have to say virtually no games at all would be given any updates if there was little to no cash in making the update itself. Useless work to please the gaming community. Sure, when you can get it so well advertised like Valve can it really pays off, but it's just such a risky thing to do. I recall most map updates 'back in the day' to be mostly community made anyway, which we still have for PC games. And I'd have to argue that Gears of War maps probably matter a lot to people that actually studied and learned how to play that game to a more full extent than most people, as with any game.

[Crispy Dave]

Yeah I learned about that MW2 server stuff yesterday. Pretty disappointing, as I was planning to buy it on PC. Might just go for the 360 version now. But your DLC rant is a little harsh. What 2-hour add-on did you pay $30 for? The only $30 add-on I can think of is (or was) The Shivering Isles, and I got way more than 2 hours out of that. Please don't exaggerate these numbers to try and make your point.

all the MAss effect stuff, Halo 3 maps, and other stuff I am glad I'm not remembering.


I'm afraid I can't make any sense of this statement. I can only assume you're using the term "DRM" in a new and exciting way known only to yourself.
Sorry assume by DRM I mean Anti-Piracy.










Two cents:

1) DRM as argued against in this thread is not convincing, and DRM itself isn't a bad thing. So capping off the argument that is already lacking any examples or real points with DRM = bad is just showing a herd mentality on the subject. That being said, my favorite method of 'DRM' (in the looser sense) is Steam. Because it serves a very useful purpose. I can download games multiple times on any computer with no issues. Whereas my disks tend to get broken by my baby brother near instantly, and when my hard drive fails (like just last week) I lose all my Direct Download game files. And since only one person can be playing a game on an account at a time, I'd have to say it reduces file sharing to an acceptable level.


I agree that Steam is a great form of DRM. If any of you notice I use steam quite often. I like steam because I can download as many times as I want.




also thanks to the people who supported my statement while I took my nap ;).

[shadow_archmagi]

My four cents:

1. Graphics and CPU requirements: I'm playing on my seven year old computer. It meets minimum requirements, and I havn't been disappointed in it yet. TF2, L4D, STALKER, Dawn of War 2 (which I actually got rid of in favor of regular Dwan of Wor but still)

Admittedly, I have had to up the graphics card and RAM a couple times, but it works. I still believe that upping the visuals in games is a poor choice, but that's a pointless dream.

I am going to have to upgrade sometime this year because my machine is falling apart though. Saving as fast as I can.

2. DRM:

It's not a very helpful word any more, given that it basically just means "Anti-piracy measures" and thus covers everything from CD keys to machine-locks. Machine locks are a pain. "Only three machines and then this CD will self destruct" What? So I install it on my laptop, install it on my desktop, get wierd errors, reinstall, and now I throw the CD away.

I doubt that "Consoles get less piracy and so that means that PC games have more anti-piracy measures" is really solid reason to despise consoles...

3.

Dedicated Servers: Lolmatchmaking.

Oh god matchmaking is an awful idea. Let me have my hosts, my server admins, and my random servers that run crazy mods and gamemodes.

[leafman]

Ok... is there something about the first part of that post that makes the second part invisible or something? :smallconfused:
I only dressed that Strawman up for my own amusement :smalltongue:

Here it is again:

I haven't tried to play any of the newer games like Batman: AA on a PC in several years (I believe I stated something to that effect). So in lieu of someone shouting about a change in the trend, I kinda had to assume that nothing had changed about new PC games needing the newest and most powerful hardware on the market just to have a decent game experience.

Anyway Batman still requires 3.0 Ghz processor, 3 gigs of RAM, NVidia 7900 GT or equivalent for the recommended or 3 Ghz, 2 gigs RAM and a NVidia 6600 to run on minimum. The desktop I got about 2 years ago only has a 2.6 Ghz processor.

[Arbitrarity]

Is that a single core (Pentium IV), or multicore, like a core2? Because the "minimum requirement" typically specifies a P4, which means anything newer, like a Core 2, can easily run it, even with a lower clockspeed. (because clockspeed cannot be directly compared, as many other factors affect the speed of the processor)

And if you have a 2.6 P4 that you got 2 years ago, fail. My 6 year old P4 is running at 3.4 GHz without overclocking.

[shadow_archmagi]

Is that a single core (Pentium IV), or multicore, like a core2? Because the "minimum requirement" typically specifies a P4, which means anything newer, like a Core 2, can easily run it, even with a lower clockspeed. (because clockspeed cannot be directly compared, as many other factors affect the speed of the processor)

And if you have a 2.6 P4 that you got 2 years ago, fail. My 6 year old P4 is running at 3.4 GHz without overclocking.

My seven year old is dual wielding pentium 4s with 2.4 GHZ each.

[tyckspoon]

Anyway Batman still requires 3.0 Ghz processor, 3 gigs of RAM, NVidia 7900 GT or equivalent for the recommended or 3 Ghz, 2 gigs RAM and a NVidia 6600 to run on minimum. The desktop I got about 2 years ago only has a 2.6 Ghz processor.

Anything half-decent you buy off the shelf nowadays will hit that recommended spec on everything except the video card. For that, you need roughly an $80 (online prices) card. I'm sorry you haven't been paying attention, but things have actually changed; midrange cards right now are pretty awesomely powerful, and will comfortably run anything unless the developer is pulling a Crysis and purposefully building a game engine that needs *next years* estimated high-end cards to run.

[Myatar_Panwar]

So wait..... you bought a new computer two years ago yet haven't even tried to play any of the more recent PC games for several years?

[Knaight]

Well, nobody raised the issue of gradual yet constant reducing of the amount of thinking needed to complete a game, non-existence of decent plots or putting 95% of the budget into graphics and special effects instead of developing of the game itself yet, that doesn't happen often :smalltongue:

Clearly this means we need to head to the Wotc forums to discuss this.:smalltongue:

On another note, you need to buy DROD, the City Beneath. Because its funny seeing new people lose all over the place, and it requires lots of thinking and has a decent plot, not great, but not bad.

[Crispy Dave]

Anyway Batman still requires 3.0 Ghz processor, 3 gigs of RAM, NVidia 7900 GT or equivalent for the recommended or 3 Ghz, 2 gigs RAM and a NVidia 6600 to run on minimum. The desktop I got about 2 years ago only has a 2.6 Ghz processor.

ummm I played the demo with 2 gigs of ram with a fine framerate.

[leafman]

Right, the new one wasn't really an improvement of the one before it. It was a replacement because the one before it which wasn't very old, decided it didn't want to boot up and it would have cost more to find out what was wrong than get a new one.
Its a dual core 2.6 but the graphics card is crap aand back then every single new game I was interested in wanted to push the limits of graphics cards with their fancy shaders and making the water "realistic" :smallbiggrin: It doesn't really matter anyway cause if I don't know what I'm missing I haven't missed much.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand, how are those dang consoles and their online games ruining our beloved PC's :smalltongue:
From what the OP mentioned DLC's costing money is the only thing so far, and you can blame Microsoft for their invention of the "micro-transaction" for that one.

[Myatar_Panwar]

A dual core 2.6 is like running two 2.6 single cores. You would be perfectly fine to run batman with that processor. In fact, the steam requirements for it state:

Processor: 3Ghz Intel or AMD or any Dual Core

[warty goblin]

Ironically, the only games my PC, which is hardly cutting edge, ever has trouble running are console ports. I can run most PC exclusives on high enough settings that they honestly look better than most console games anyway. The only PC exclusives I have that I don't run on at least mostly high are Crysis and ArmA, both of which do things that would make a console weep for mercy.

Now don't get me wrong, a year or two I was very bitter about consoles, but with the recent upswing in really ace PC titles from Eastern Europe and Russia, the establishment of a real solid indie market, and my conversion to digital distribution, I'm really not anymore. In a couple months I'll hack up $400 or so for a new processor and graphics card, get a machine that'll leave the consoles in the dirt and keep my games running smoothly for another 3-4 years without any worries.

[Avilan the Grey]

In his third point about DRM he explicitly states why the PC is getting the shaft here because of consoles.

And the stuff about not having dedicated server support: While playing a game on the PC like TF2 or counterstrike, you get a list of servers hosted by dudes, which you can filter for things like latency, player count, etc. You can have favorite servers and servers you'd rather not see.

Consoles have matchmaking. MW2 is getting console matchmaking.

Yes, but it's not true. The reason for DRM has nothing to do with consoles, and everything with piracy. And it has been around since before consoles had discs.

As for the matchmaking thing: I still don't see why this is the consoles fault?

[Stormthorn]

Baring the Sims, decent expansion packs had entire campaigns, not just 4 new maps or outfits.

A: WHy are we barring the sims? Isnt it a little shallow to only allow evidence that supports your own point.

B: Expansion packs also often cost more than DLC's.
Especialy if you wait a year or two and buy the Game Of The Year Addition (assuming its a game good enough to have one) and save $60 on them when bundled. Like with Fallout 3 GOTY.


An example of why random host connections are bad is again, Gears of War. Have you seen the host advantage? It's insane!
Because everyone else lags? Yea, i guess that is bad.


Halo 3 maps
You really cant put a label of "this is good for X hours of fun" on a mappack. The maps remain fun for as long as you play the game. Although i agree they are somewhat steep.


3) DRM
DRM is also being pushed because of this. Developers see that games can't be as easily pirated on consoles and sell games on them as a form of DRM. It also is used as encouragement for games that are released on the PC to have heavier DRM.
Anti-piracy is a good thing in my mind.
Perhaps just because i dont know how to steal stuff online and the only guy i know who offers me pirated games i dont trust. (I dont trust anyone who has a computer whos sole purpose is testing out the viruses he makes.)

[warty goblin]

A: WHy are we barring the sims? Isnt it a little shallow to only allow evidence that supports your own point.

It's one game, which does not a trend make. All that it allows you to do is refute any use of a universal argument. Since Dihan noted the Sims as an exception, s/he avoided any logical falicy in regards to that series.


B: Expansion packs also often cost more than DLC's.
Especialy if you wait a year or two and buy the Game Of The Year Addition (assuming its a game good enough to have one) and save $60 on them when bundled. Like with Fallout 3 GOTY.
Also known as 'let's screw over people who actually like the enough to buy it on release!' This also assumes the game is popular enough to get a rerelease, which a lot of titles, even those with multiple DLC packs, are not. Thanks, but no thanks, I prefer the Old Ways; releasing the expansion pack at the same time as the box with both the expansion and the base game.



You really cant put a label of "this is good for X hours of fun" on a mappack. The maps remain fun for as long as you play the game.
Which is true of precisely every other feature of a game that doesn't completely suck. It's also worth noting that maps used to be free and often community made, because they released Map Editors. The last console game to do that was what, Far Cry 2?

[Teln]

Which is true of precisely every other feature of a game that doesn't completely suck. It's also worth noting that maps used to be free and often community made, because they released Map Editors. The last console game to do that was what, Far Cry 2?
Super Smash Bros: Brawl lets you make your own custom stages, does that count?

[Artanis]

Anti-piracy is a good thing in my mind.
Perhaps just because i dont know how to steal stuff online and the only guy i know who offers me pirated games i dont trust. (I dont trust anyone who has a computer whos sole purpose is testing out the viruses he makes.)

Except that it doesn't work. And that's when it's not destroying your computer, which some anti-piracy software has been known to do.

[Avilan the Grey]

Except that it doesn't work. And that's when it's not destroying your computer, which some anti-piracy software has been known to do.

...And again: What does that have to do with consoles? :smalltongue:
The fact that EA have had to cut down on their DRM policy due to customer outrage is a good thing. But again, the basic reason for the various DRM and other anti-piracy tools is... Piracy. I remember copy-protected discs for games on PC when all consoles were still using cartridges.
(Yes, I am old enough to remember having to install Windows 95 from floppy discs).

[Artanis]

...And again: What does that have to do with consoles? :smalltongue:
The fact that EA have had to cut down on their DRM policy due to customer outrage is a good thing. But again, the basic reason for the various DRM and other anti-piracy tools is... Piracy. I remember copy-protected discs for games on PC when all consoles were still using cartridges.
(Yes, I am old enough to remember having to install Windows 95 from floppy discs).

My post doesn't really have much of anything to do with consoles. I was responding to the person saying that anti-piracy stuff was a good thing.

[factotum]

I think you could make an equally good argument that World of Warcraft is ruining PC gaming because the 11 million or so people who play that don't ever buy any other games! 11 million, even worldwide, is a lot of people taken out of the gaming market.

[Myatar_Panwar]

As for the matchmaking thing: I still don't see why this is the consoles fault?

Because it is a console thing.

They get to monitor what their servers see and what they don't. One step closer to charging for map packs, which I don't think the CoD series did to the PC in the past. Now that its a GFWL game, they very well could.

And it sucks.

[KBF]

So don't buy the maps?

'Capitalism is evil' is way too popular a sentiment. They're just trying to make cash from making video games. If enough people feel that the maps are worth the money and purchase them, there's no reason to be complaining that they made more maps and want to be compensated. Sure, there's a line to be crossed when a game is shipped without enough maps for the purpose of selling additional ones, but that doesn't seem to be happening.

[Mystic Muse]

only game I really play is fable the lost chapters for PC so it doesn't really matter to me. I'm going to get Morrowind from my Library and Diablo 2 from my friend though.

[shadow_archmagi]

Because it is a console thing.

They get to monitor what their servers see and what they don't.

I'm still not really seeing how this is like... a benefit.

I mean, Valve gets along just fine without matchmaking, and TF2 is still able to collect all sorts of data from the servers and whatnot...

Surely outsourcing an expensive part of a game's operations would save money and time AND satisfy the playerbase?

[Triaxx]

It's not that 'Capitalism is Evil'. It's that we aren't getting the value for the money that we used to. Now we pay $40 for ten maps, where we used to pay $40 for ten maps, two campaigns, and several new weapons.

And the Sims is just the exception to the rule. However, even among MMO's it's the exception. Everquest, WoW, FFXI, all have expansion packs that give great value for the money.

DRM doesn't work. Pirates punch through even the toughest DRM in a matter of days. It was five days from release to fully functional on the obsessive DRM for Mass Effect. As a matter of fact DRM promotes piracy, by treating even paying customers as criminals for buying the game. And that's not good business sense, period.

[Querzis]

I think you could make an equally good argument that World of Warcraft is ruining PC gaming because the 11 million or so people who play that don't ever buy any other games! 11 million, even worldwide, is a lot of people taken out of the gaming market.

...Since pretty much everyone in the WoW thread play lots of other games (including myself) I dont get how thats an argument. The chinese farmer probably dont play anything else but its not like they would play other games even if WoW woudnt be around. I played WoW since it came out and I still play Warcraft 3 more often then WoW even now.

Anyway, I'm almost wondering if the OP is trolling. The first argument isnt true at all and I really dont see how the two others got anything to do with Online console gaming ruining PC gaming.

[MickJay]

DRM doesn't work. Pirates punch through even the toughest DRM in a matter of days. It was five days from release to fully functional on the obsessive DRM for Mass Effect. As a matter of fact DRM promotes piracy, by treating even paying customers as criminals for buying the game. And that's not good business sense, period.

Some things appear in DRM-free, pirated form even before the official releases. I remember someone saying that they've bought a DRMed game because they felt it was good, but got a pirated version to actually play it. Others simply won't bother buying the game in the first place.

[Bouregard]

Some things appear in DRM-free, pirated form even before the official releases. I remember someone saying that they've bought a DRMed game because they felt it was good, but got a pirated version to actually play it. Others simply won't bother buying the game in the first place.

Especially today with highly packed DVD and high read speed DRM is pretty error prone. Quite some games want me to insert the orginal disk, while it's already in place. I don't know why they want to make paying customers so much trouble. If I simply download it it's plug&play without a endless registration conga to at least 2 sites and then being allowed to play. I wonder how I will be able to install todays games in 10years...

[Stormthorn]

Except that it doesn't work. And that's when it's not destroying your computer, which some anti-piracy software has been known to do.

Thats more a problem of the DRM tech being unpolished and new.

But the alternative is to not have any protection and pray that people will still buy your game, which, base dupont he complaints about DRM here, is unlikely. Everyone here complaining would just get it illlegaly if their was no protection or consequences at all.


I think you could make an equally good argument that World of Warcraft is ruining PC gaming because the 11 million or so people who play that don't ever buy any other games! 11 million, even worldwide, is a lot of people taken out of the gaming market.

I second this opinion! Let us destroy all our consoles and burn the Blizzard headquarters.


Which is true of precisely every other feature of a game that doesn't completely suck. It's also worth noting that maps used to be free and often community made, because they released Map Editors. The last console game to do that was what, Far Cry 2?
I want them free. I was just refuting someones point that we only get 2 hours of joy out of what we buy nowadays. We get as much time as we want.
I got lots of joy for my $10 buying Point Lookout which adds a mapspace probably 1/5 or 1/6 as large as the origional world back into the game with its own questline, sidequests, new enemies, and new weapons.

And Halo 3 has a weak map editor but you cant make any terrain changes.

[Ikialev]

Wait. DRM is this thing that doesn't let you install more than 3 times, right?
Why would you install one game three times.

[Kris Strife]

I actually prefer consoles because I don't have to update my console's hardware until the entire next gen comes out, which can be anywhere up to what, ten years or more? A brand new, state of the art PC has at least one part thats all but obsolete with in six months if you're buying the newest stuff.

Total agreement on the dumbing down of games (FFXII: The Game That Plays Itself!) and the DRM suff that limits how many times you can install something or makes you have to pay for it a second time if you get a new PC.

On DLC though: I've actually been careful with what I've grabbed DLC wise for add ons. Probably the only impulse thing I've gotten that actually cost money was extra character and story line packs for Disgaea 3, and of course, being a NIS game, each of those basically adds a potentially near infinite amount of playtime to the game. (level 9999, then reincarnate back to level 1, rinse and repeat till you're dealing trillions of damage in one blow.)


Wait. DRM is this thing that doesn't let you install more than 3 times, right?
Why would you install one game three times.

New PC, having to wipe your hard drive, game glitched, you deleted the wrong file, parents deleted the file, significant other deleted the file, siblings or other relatives deleted the file, you decided to uninstall the game to make extra room, you've got more memory availible for gaming now and want to reinstall, the installation process failed to work properly, you installed it on a PC that didn't have the specs to run it and decided to delete it until it could run it, etc, etc etc.

[Triaxx]

MickJay: That was just the name I grabbed for because it was popular.

Not to mention windows habit of damaging registry entries and having to reinstall the game to correct it. Or the habit of files to suddenly become corrupt for no particular reason.

[Zeful]

My post doesn't really have much of anything to do with consoles. I was responding to the person saying that anti-piracy stuff was a good thing.

It is a good thing as DRM it's the only thing keeping the stockholders from bailing. From an economic point of view, it's either DRM or nothing. If stockholders can't be assured on a return on their investment, they will leave, and new ones won't come. The company will lose millions of dollars and will need to start closing down the risky or unprofitable divisions (if they exist) which with the level of piracy in the world today will be gaming divisions. Without DRM, gaming goes away.

[Indon]

It is a good thing as DRM it's the only thing keeping the stockholders from bailing. From an economic point of view, it's either DRM or nothing.
From an economic point of view, DRM doesn't work.

From a practical point of view, though, you're right - because investors tend to be technically illiterate, and don't realize that people interested in pirating just bypass DRM, minimizing the impact and restricting it largely to legitmate consumers. So without the idea that DRM fights piracy, corporate-capitalized gaming could indeed be in danger.

But that's not due to the DRM. Thats due to the technical ignorance of investment capital managers.

[factotum]

...Since pretty much everyone in the WoW thread play lots of other games (including myself) I dont get how thats an argument.

I didn't say it was a good argument, merely that it was equally as good as the ones in the OP...

[Zeful]

From an economic point of view, DRM doesn't work.

From a practical point of view, though, you're right - because investors tend to be technically illiterate, and don't realize that people interested in pirating just bypass DRM, minimizing the impact and restricting it largely to legitmate consumers. So without the idea that DRM fights piracy, corporate-capitalized gaming could indeed be in danger.

But that's not due to the DRM. Thats due to the technical ignorance of investment capital managers.

Point.

It would be more economically viable to go file suits against torrent sites that illegally allow copies to be downloaded, making it possible to recoup some of the losses caused by pirating rather then place DRM on the product, but the investors have a lot of say in how the corporation's run.

[Indon]

It would be more economically viable to go file suits against torrent sites that illegally allow copies to be downloaded, making it possible to recoup some of the losses caused by pirating rather then place DRM on the product, but the investors have a lot of say in how the corporation's run.

Economically, but not legally.

The most viable way to fight piracy is by incentivizing non-piracy measures, such as through Steam's various perks. With enough perks, people forget they're operating a form of de facto DRM contingent on the continued thriving on the central company to function.

[PinkysBrain]

I don't think the MW2 castration is going to work out well for Activision in the end ... there are still plenty of developers who do deliver good games on all platforms which don't castrate the PC down to console level. It will be a very short lived game on PCs I think.

As for invasive buggy DRM, that's hardly a new thing ... incompatibilities of some DRM schemes with CD-ROM drives date back almost a decade. Can't really blame this on consoles.

I dislike that games are essentially designed around console controllers though. Not only can hotbars on PCs accommodate many more abilities, it's also much easier to assign abilities on a PC. I'm sure that for instance Dragon Age's magic system has been designed around the console controllers. The simplified MMORPG ability systems in recent MMORPGs is probably decided by suits at early stages of just about every MMORPG at this point, just in case they want to port to consoles.

Any way, just don't buy MW2, don't buy games with DRM which offends you and don't play MMORPGs with shallow ability systems designed for console controllers. Also whine about it on forums :)

[Myrmex]

The dumbing down of MMORPG ability systems in recent MMORPGs is probably decided by suits at early stages of just about every MMORPG at this point, just in case they want to port to consoles.

I doubt it.
The dumbing down is to keep noobs playing. WoW is a great example of a growing noob player base and continued appeasement to the noobs. MMORPGs rely on a different market strategy- you can't just sell the game and forget about it. You gotta keep people hooked.

[Oslecamo]

I doubt it.
The dumbing down is to keep noobs playing. WoW is a great example of a growing noob player base and continued appeasement to the noobs. MMORPGs rely on a different market strategy- you can't just sell the game and forget about it. You gotta keep people hooked.

No, no, Wow is a money machine so that Blizzard can take their sweet time developing Starcraft II so that when it comes out it will be a worthy game of all the hardcore Starcraft players out there!

It's fair really. One game for the noobs, another for the pros. To each their own.

[Weimann]

I object to the usage of the word "noob" here. Let's call things what they are, shall we?

I do agree that WoW from when I began and WoW from when I quit is a whole different bag of bones, though, but let's not derail the tread with that discussion.

[shadow_archmagi]

I doubt it.
The dumbing down is to keep noobs playing. WoW is a great example of a growing noob player base and continued appeasement to the noobs. MMORPGs rely on a different market strategy- you can't just sell the game and forget about it. You gotta keep people hooked.

Er, isn't WoW the game where if I so chose I can literally cover my entire screen with hotkey slots without actually leaving any spare room?


On the subject of DRM: There already ARE no complications, barriers, or repercussions. Of everyone I know who has ever pirated, I know of a single person who received a single angry letter.

"Harder to pirate" is not the correct expression to be using here. Infinite SEAS of drm don't really put a dent the difficulty curve. Have you ever made fried potatoes and sausage? Circumventing security is about that difficult and time consuming on average (and that's an average made far too high by outlier people who have to start over several times. Really, if you're moderately computer literate, it is very simple.)

That leaves us with two groups of people:

1. The people who have no problems with your DRM and are not inconvenienced at all by it.

2. The people who gave you money.

[Triaxx]

Stardock would like to disagree with you that DRM serves a purpose. Shareholders don't care about the product or even the consumer as long as they continue to get money. If we stop buying products with DRM's they'll force them to stop using DRM's. Otherwise they don't care because they're still raking in money.

[Stormthorn]

Stardock would like to disagree with you that DRM serves a purpose. Shareholders don't care about the product or even the consumer as long as they continue to get money. If we stop buying products with DRM's they'll force them to stop using DRM's. Otherwise they don't care because they're still raking in money.

What are the odds that millions of gamers with wildly disparate opinions are ever going to boycott a company like that?

[Artanis]

It's done plenty of damage to Starforce.

[Myrmex]

No, no, Wow is a money machine so that Blizzard can take their sweet time developing Starcraft II so that when it comes out it will be a worthy game of all the hardcore Starcraft players out there!

It's fair really. One game for the noobs, another for the pros. To each their own.

I'm fine with Blizzard raking in the cash of WoW. It is an incredible game. But I'm just not into paying for my addictions.


I object to the usage of the word "noob" here. Let's call things what they are, shall we?

Ok, what are things called, then?


I do agree that WoW from when I began and WoW from when I quit is a whole different bag of bones, though, but let's not derail the tread with that discussion.

It's not derailment, though. It's directly pertinent to discussion at hand.


Er, isn't WoW the game where if I so chose I can literally cover my entire screen with hotkey slots without actually leaving any spare room?

Sure, if you download the mods.

But that's not what I'm talking about. Pinky seems to believe that suits are actually making interface decisions on MMORPGs because there might be a console port, and I think that's highly unlikely. If you look at cases where they make the game easier, they're almost always money making schemes. In the case of WoW getting continually easier since its release, its about retaining 11 million softcore players. With some of the Asian MMORPGs, you simply pay the company for better gear, rather than waste your time grinding it out.

[MCerberus]

Matchmaking is the biggest monster in the darkness, stalking in the shadows of online gaming waiting to pounce. It's acceptable due to practical issues in consoles (I mean really, who's going to let their xbox run all day not playing it), but it takes the community out of PC multiplayer games.

When I started playing, my first game punted you into an IRC channel to get a match together with other people who want to play a similar style of game (C&C). Many shooters, especially under the UT engine did similar or had a strong community bent. You played with people you could kind of tell you'd have a fun time playing with to begin, and now Steam is performing the same function. If you like a group of people, you keep playing with them. If you want to mix things up, you can go to a dedicated server with something new.

Xbox live has nothing similar. You get punted into a random game where the exploiters cheat rampantly because they're not getting caught. People mic spam CONSTANTLY because they will never see you again. Everyone just out to have fun is stuck in their isolated little parties, talking to their close static group of friends.

The whole "matchmaking encourages price gouged map packs" is perhaps a valid argument. I'm not going to make that now because this post is long enough as is.


Last thought: DLCs that are horrendous money grabs that likely would have been free if PC only: Pretty much anything for Oblivion, new outfits for fighting games, EA's "buy a better gun" policy, Mass Effect addons, charging 2 dollars+ for a single song for music games, $10 for 3 maps (done by multiple parties).

[MickJay]

Ok, what are things called, then?

Newbies. You can still be a n00b with high level, good gear and a few years' worth of playing if you're dumb enough, but you stop being a newbie after grasping the basics/after reaching a certain point in the game. Typically games get easier for new players as the time passes, to help them chase up a little to the veteran players.

Also, without new players, MMO servers tend to die out. Dedicating a server "for pros only" is a very good way of killing that server. You end up with 50 or 100 people in top equipment who are bored to death with PvPing each other

[Weimann]

Ok, what are things called, then?It's called "RPG players" and "RTS players".

Saying that WoW is a "game for noobs" while StarCraft II will be a "game for pros" is a stunted comparison to make. It sounds like a person will have a quantified "game skill" stat that is directly applicable to every game genre. I believe that WoW will be a game for people who like MMORPGs, while StarCraft II will be one for people who like RTS.

Because believing that StarCraft II will be free of noobs (or newbs, or newbies, by any definition of the word, it's really not a good word) is just not a realistic view.

As a swift comment: WoW has been "simplified", maybe to the point where it is taken to far. The reason for this is probably twofold, namely 1) to secure their old player base by making them not have to play through the entire game over and over when making new characters, and 2) to bring the new players up to where the action is swifter. It is true that the end game is also significantly less demanding these days, and I suppose that can be interpreted as a step towards "casuality" (for some definition). Whether this is a good or bad thing, I will leave unsaid.

[Myrmex]

Newbies. You can still be a n00b with high level, good gear and a few years' worth of playing if you're dumb enough, but you stop being a newbie after grasping the basics/after reaching a certain point in the game. Typically games get easier for new players as the time passes, to help them chase up a little to the veteran players.

No, I am referring to the noobs, the people who play for years, but fail to grasp the game's theory well enough to be even reasonably competent. Or, you know, have a life outside their parents' basement. :smallwink:


Also, without new players, MMO servers tend to die out. Dedicating a server "for pros only" is a very good way of killing that server. You end up with 50 or 100 people in top equipment who are bored to death with PvPing each other

I understand the necessity. You also need players to keep the business afloat.



It's called "RPG players" and "RTS players".

Saying that WoW is a "game for noobs" while StarCraft II will be a "game for pros" is a stunted comparison to make. It sounds like a person will have a quantified "game skill" stat that is directly applicable to every game genre. I believe that WoW will be a game for people who like MMORPGs, while StarCraft II will be one for people who like RTS.

I think it's a casual player vs. hardcore gamer sort of thing. WoW has had years of nerfing, to retain a bigger player base. And that's not my comparison. Quote someone else, please.


Because believing that StarCraft II will be free of noobs (or newbs, or newbies, by any definition of the word, it's really not a good word) is just not a realistic view.

But noobs QQing about my leet hydra dancing skills will be ignored, while in WoW, noobs QQing about Nax will have their demands met. It's the difference between PvM & PvP.


As a swift comment: WoW has been "simplified", maybe to the point where it is taken to far. The reason for this is probably twofold, namely 1) to secure their old player base by making them not have to play through the entire game over and over when making new characters, and 2) to bring the new players up to where the action is swifter. It is true that the end game is also significantly less demanding these days, and I suppose that can be interpreted as a step towards "casuality" (for some definition). Whether this is a good or bad thing, I will leave unsaid.

I don't think it's really 1 or 2, but mostly your unnumbered 3. I don't play WoW, so I don't care, either way. I do know that when I played on my friend's account, being able to level quickly and acquire sweet gear fast sure was fun. Back when you had to ping for herbs/ore every 15 seconds and it only worked in like a 20 yard radius was TEDIOUS. Now, it's just a little aura that makes ore nodes show up on the mini map. Also, they sparkle a little. Much better, imo. But some people enjoy more hoops to jump through. Most don't, and with the MMORPG's sort of market strategy, you have to go towards the most.

[Aotrs Commander]

Stardock would like to disagree with you that DRM serves a purpose. Shareholders don't care about the product or even the consumer as long as they continue to get money. If we stop buying products with DRM's they'll force them to stop using DRM's. Otherwise they don't care because they're still raking in money.

Stardock always seem to me to have their heads screwed on straight in many ways. A lot of gaming companies would do well to follow their example. Their 'copy protection' is to make you have a registered copy to use with their own Impulse downloader to get the patches and updates. Which is a fairly benign way of dealing with it (certainly better than Steam in my not-even-remotely-humble opinion.) Mind you, that's true of a quite a lot of smaller companies (e.g Telltale). (Though I'm not so sure Stardock is exactly small; though yeah, they're not EA...)

Even EA is ramping back on the DRM, though, after the massive outcry. They added de-registration tools for most of their DRM games, so you could essentially uninstall and re-install as much as you like; you just can't have the games on more than three computers at once. Which, while a pain in my ass, is better than the alternative. (Because I've already had to replace my hard-drive!)

Though their latest attempt, for C&C 4, preportedly will require you to be online all the time when playing, even when playing the single-player version. Supposedly part of this is due to you having a profile that spans across single-and-multiplayer (which at least makes some more sense than DoW2 that also did that, and was one of the main reasons I skipped that game), but I'm still not sure about it myself. Though it's supposed to be the only copy-protection the game has. Whether this will come to pass or not is another question, best answered closer to the time of release.

Bioware, despite being under EA's umbrella, seem to have their heads on right as well, as they announced - to near-universal accolades, they were only having a standard disk check as their copy protection.

So clearly even the big companies realise that their mishandling of copy-protection needs to be revised; it obviously did hit them in the pocket enought to register - or perhaps rather it didn't hit their pocket.

[factotum]

I like the way Egosoft (developers of the X game series) do copy protection. The game as originally released has copy protection, because the publishers demand it. However, after the game's been about a year or so they release a content patch that also removes the DRM, allowing you to play the game without the disc in the drive. Best of both worlds, IMHO.

[Jahkaivah]

Wait. DRM is this thing that doesn't let you install more than 3 times, right?
Why would you install one game three times.

No, DRM refers to digital-right management. Which is methods of limiting access to a piece of software in order to prevent breaches of copyright and piracy.

The 3-installation limit was a feature of securom, a bit of code that came with some games, which some games made use of, securom was a form of DRM which is why the term was being thrown about during the Spore controversy.

As for why it was a bad thing, there are various reasons:

- Cracked copies of the game didn't actually have this limitation, so not only was it not doing it's job, but it was actually making piracy more appealing. Plus it's punsihing those who do the right thing.
- If it didn't give you back the install limits, you were effectively force to make a phone call if you ever needed for whatever reason to uninstall and reinstall the game 3 times.
- You needed the rely on the companies support indefinatly (strictly speaking the same criticism can be lobbed at Valve's steam, but people tend to trust Valve more)

[Domochevsky]

Little insert here.


...
It would be more economically viable to go file suits against torrent sites that illegally allow copies to be downloaded, making it possible to recoup some of the losses caused by pirating rather then place DRM on the product, but the investors have a lot of say in how the corporation's run.

Actually i kinda doubt the "losses" the companies have. Experience has shown that those who pirate are highly unlikely to buy, in any case.

Personally i also think DRM should be designed in a way to give incentives (positive features) to buy a particular piece of software instead of trying to scare you away or outright block you off (which never works).

[Joran]

No, DRM refers to digital-right management. Which is methods of limiting access to a piece of software in order to prevent breaches of copyright and piracy.

The 3-installation limit was a feature of securom, a bit of code that came with some games, which some games made use of, securom was a form of DRM which is why the term was being thrown about during the Spore controversy.

As for why it was a bad thing, there are various reasons:

- Cracked copies of the game didn't actually have this limitation, so not only was it not doing it's job, but it was actually making piracy more appealing. Plus it's punsihing those who do the right thing.
- If it didn't give you back the install limits, you were effectively force to make a phone call if you ever needed for whatever reason to uninstall and reinstall the game 3 times.
- You needed the rely on the companies support indefinatly (strictly speaking the same criticism can be lobbed at Valve's steam, but people tend to trust Valve more)

Ah, SecuROM, how I hate thee.

Basically, SecuROM installs invisible registry entries, so if you ever uninstall the game, you can't remove SecuROM. Also, most games don't tell you up front that they ship with that protection scheme, but instead tell you right as you are installing the game.

SecuROM in particularly has been known to disable legitimate pieces of hardware like CD burners and Nero.

It depends on the DRM. The DRM can be as simple as online activation or a disc check to something as full-blown as SecuROM which has install limits, frequent Internet checks, and invisible registry entries.

Personally, I'm not too affected by requirements like downloading a day 1 patch or install limits, but I can definitely see why some people, especially people in the military or overseas with spotty internet connections, can be very inconvenienced by DRM.


Personally i also think DRM should be designed in a way to give incentives (positive features) to buy a particular piece of software instead of trying to scare you away or outright block you off (which never works).

I'm seeing this more with console games at the moment. PC games don't really have a re-sale market, but console games do. So, to encourage people to buy new rather than buy used, companies are starting to release DLC that's tied to an online one-time use code that's free for people who buy new but cost money for people who buy used. Rock Band 2 and Dragon Age: Origins are two I can think of off the top of my head.

DLC... now that's a topic that's probably going to really start annoying people on consoles, but not quite yet on PC. PC gaming has a nice and long history of free DLC, so companies tend not to charge for it for the most part.

[Domochevsky]

...
Basically, SecuROM installs invisible registry entries, so if you ever uninstall the game, you can't remove SecuROM. Also, most games don't tell you up front that they ship with that protection scheme, but instead tell you right as you are installing the game.
...

It's not even just that. You can see where they put their regkeys just fine, it's just that have been made in a way so you can't read and, by extension, delete them with the normal regeditor. Instead you need a special tool for that. For the interested: Regdelnull, official microsoft tool
Not to mention the (kinda shady) drivers it installs as well, meaning that you have to dig through your device manager, searching for and manually uninstalling them to get rid of the whole shebang, even after uninstalling the game. :smallannoyed:

And they won't even tell you that they're doing it. In fact, game packages around here are only required to read "this product is protected by copy protection schemes", without saying what specifically is on them or when/where they are installed.


And then there was the Sony rootkit issue... but that's another level entirely.


Of course all this has little to do with console games. (Although... didn't the PSX use those black CDs as a sort of DRM?)

[Aotrs Commander]

Didn't EA get sued over SecuROM or some such, or did that blow over (or did they win)?

[Fiendish_Dire_Moose]

Of course all this has little to do with console games. (Although... didn't the PSX use those black CDs as a sort of DRM?)

Possibly, all I know is my friend pirated games for the PS, and it was easy.

[Jahkaivah]

Personally i also think DRM should be designed in a way to give incentives (positive features) to buy a particular piece of software instead of trying to scare you away or outright block you off (which never works).

Part of the reason Steam is so successful is that it does this by giving people an easy and fast way to get their games onto any computer connected to the internet.

[Artanis]

Frankly, I hate the hardcore vs. casual arguments. They are generally little more than people using one of the two terms to insult and belittle others. This is not always the case, mind you, but those who do not use the terms insultingly in such (so-called) debates are a tiny minority.

Further, people who use the terms insultingly generally won't define what they mean by them. When pressed to say at what point somebody is "hardcore" or "casual", they almost always either refuse, give some vague meaningless brush-off, or change the subject.

The few times they do point to something, that something changes over time. Autocast in particular comes to mind: Brood War was vehemently accused of "dumbing down" StarCraft because you could set the Medic to autocast her heals, and look how it turned out in competitive play. WarCraft 3 was accused of the same as autocast was made more prevalent (Bloodlust in particular was a major focus), but it wasn't long before the self-proclaimed "hardcore" players were demanding that more things be made autocast.

/vent

[Narudude360]

But your DLC rant is a little harsh. What 2-hour add-on did you pay $30 for? The only $30 add-on I can think of is (or was) The Shivering Isles, and I got way more than 2 hours out of that.

Please don't exaggerate these numbers to try and make your point.

Yeah, but why do they bother keeping it on LIVE if you can buy the GotYE for the same price as the original but with both expansions? I guess if you live in the middle of nowhere...

Your rant is pathetic. I bought all the Gears of War 2 Maps and the deleted campaign for $20. I feel that you have a bone with crappy developers, but these DLC are the way to extend shelf life, not improve people who already own the game's experience. Halo 3 has 2 free DLC, (Cold Storage and Heroic DLC).

[Indon]

Frankly, I hate the hardcore vs. casual arguments. They are generally little more than people using one of the two terms to insult and belittle others. This is not always the case, mind you, but those who do not use the terms insultingly in such (so-called) debates are a tiny minority.

Further, people who use the terms insultingly generally won't define what they mean by them. When pressed to say at what point somebody is "hardcore" or "casual", they almost always either refuse, give some vague meaningless brush-off, or change the subject.

*WARNING* TV Tropes Links Below. Proceed at your own risk. *WARNING*

All such conflicts are manifestations of the eternal battle between Stop Having Fun Guys (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StopHavingFunGuys) and Scrubs (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Scrub).

[Joran]

Frankly, I hate the hardcore vs. casual arguments. They are generally little more than people using one of the two terms to insult and belittle others. This is not always the case, mind you, but those who do not use the terms insultingly in such (so-called) debates are a tiny minority.

Further, people who use the terms insultingly generally won't define what they mean by them. When pressed to say at what point somebody is "hardcore" or "casual", they almost always either refuse, give some vague meaningless brush-off, or change the subject.

The few times they do point to something, that something changes over time. Autocast in particular comes to mind: Brood War was vehemently accused of "dumbing down" StarCraft because you could set the Medic to autocast her heals, and look how it turned out in competitive play. WarCraft 3 was accused of the same as autocast was made more prevalent (Bloodlust in particular was a major focus), but it wasn't long before the self-proclaimed "hardcore" players were demanding that more things be made autocast.

/vent

Personally, I think "execution" should be less of a priority in a lot of games, mostly RTS and fighting games. Streamline the clicks, or button combos that you need to hit, and place more of an emphasis on the interesting choices. I can see both sides though. The more "hardcore" players will say that the execution is part of the skill involved in something like a fighting game, while the "casual" player will want it to be more accessible.

As for "hardcore" vs. "casual", I personally prefer these new terms:

Tourist, Perfectionists, and Completists
http://insultswordfighting.blogspot.com/2008/01/new-taxonomy-of-gamers-hardcore-casual.html

[Oslecamo]

All such conflicts are manifestations of the eternal battle between Stop Having Fun Guys (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StopHavingFunGuys) and Scrubs (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Scrub).

Great, with all the misinformation we already have here, we just needed the kingsite of misinformation.

Specialy because by that site's standards, both links are actualy the same thing, just with shlitly diferent decorations. And have actualy nothing whatsoever to do with hardcore gamers and/or noobs.

[Zeful]

Little insert here.



Actually i kinda doubt the "losses" the companies have. Experience has shown that those who pirate are highly unlikely to buy, in any case.

Exactly, and the people that provide the free service are breaking the law. Someone has to have the disk to crack the game for the most part. Throwing a digital serial number into the code can tell you exactly who should be charged with x counts of theft/copyright violation, and who should be charged with assisting a felon.


Personally i also think DRM should be designed in a way to give incentives (positive features) to buy a particular piece of software instead of trying to scare you away or outright block you off (which never works).
Well, if the disk was made of explosives...

And yes, incentives are better than punishments, but the people that pirate should be getting a bill for the cost of what they stole and the distributors should be heavily punished, aside from being ostracized by everyone for causing problems.

[Jahkaivah]

In response to Infinity Ward's daft response, (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/10/21/modern-warfare-2-server-response/comment-page-3/#comments) PC gamers are sending them soap. (http://www.infinityward.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=129314)

God speed.

Edit: Wow Infinity Ward actually deleted the thread. :smallannoyed:

[Lord Seth]

Further, people who use the terms insultingly generally won't define what they mean by them. When pressed to say at what point somebody is "hardcore" or "casual", they almost always either refuse, give some vague meaningless brush-off, or change the subject.

One of the best definitions, I think, is from Yahtzee's Extra Punctuation column on The Escapist:
'Hardcore' doesn't mean 'Halo-playing twitchy fourteen-year-old douchebag.' 'Hardcore' gamers means the gamers who get into it. The gamers who have gamed since 256 colors were a distant wet dream. The gamers who follow all the hype and who want games with depth and innovation. The gamers who read websites like this one and ultimately the gamers who give a ****.and
Casual gamers are people who buy a Wii because the TV told them to and play it for about an hour before going off to mow the lawn or watch Days of our Lives or whatever else normal people do with their time.

[Triaxx]

No, Discs should be Made Of Explodium (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MadeOfExplodium).

[Vic_Sage]

In response to Infinity Ward's daft response, (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/10/21/modern-warfare-2-server-response/comment-page-3/#comments) PC gamers are sending them soap. (http://www.infinityward.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=129314)

God speed.
These people are idiots.

[Triaxx]

It's worked before. They change their minds just so people will stop annoying them.

[MCerberus]

If it doesn't ship with dedicated server support, it'll take about a week to get a stable conversion mod and a few days after to get it populated. It looks like IW completely missed the point and assumed people just wanted clans and horribly biased rulesets to make them win.

[warty goblin]

If it doesn't ship with dedicated server support, it'll take about a week to get a stable conversion mod and a few days after to get it populated. It looks like IW completely missed the point and assumed people just wanted clans and horribly biased rulesets to make them win.

And imagine, people wanting clans. A feature that's only been part and parcal of multiplayer shooters on the platform since the last millenium. Talk about weird desires...

[Emlyn]

If it doesn't ship with dedicated server support, it'll take about a week to get a stable conversion mod and a few days after to get it populated. It looks like IW completely missed the point and assumed people just wanted clans and horribly biased rulesets to make them win.

Except MW2 doesn't support mods, at all. To support mods you need dedicated servers. Unless of course you are talking about completely modifying the game, which I believe is illegal (whether it's right or not is a different matter) and most likely cease and desist orders will follow. Please correct me if this is wrong, but that's my understanding.

[Vic_Sage]

It's worked before. They change their minds just so people will stop annoying them.
No, they're idiots for sending in Soap. And yes I know the significance of Soap, doesn't stop it from being stupid.