id Software likes always-online DRM

cageymaru said:
Let me rephrase it in a less confrontational way; why shouldn't there be an offline mode for single player games like it has been since the 1980's when I started PC gaming? The cracked .exe scene keeps going on without a hitch, while guys like me that are actively trying to purchase legal software to support devs like Carmack are getting shit on
Click to expand...

^^^ this 100%. This same argument is being used in every facet of our lives to put more and more restrictions on us. The criminals always are going to find a way to get around it, the only people who get really inconvenienced are the people that are actually spending their dime to get the titles to begin with.
 
I prefer the "must be online" thing over the "must have disc in drive" thing. Keeps my desk clean and free from discs/cases, plus I'm always online anyway. If the internet goes out, then I have an excuse to pick up my guitar or find something new and exciting to do (HAH, right...).
 
rmdashrrootsplat said:
Then along comes metered internet... everyone except the consumer wins. :(
Click to expand...

Shhh, capitalism is supposed to be good for everyone dontcha know?

But yeah, I always assumed that capitalism was giving the consumer what they want? Seems that "theory" is full of shit because we are always told about the companies point of view on the "costs" etc etc, but we never see it from the consumers point of view. I am sorry, the whole point to capitalism is for the consumer. I could give a fuck about the companies views or problems. Give me what I want, I don't care about them. We keep getting told to "adapt" to the market. Excuse me, the market is US.

So what people need to start doing is stop buying this shit that's being shoved onto us. I won't be buying Rage, I was already on the fence anyways because it seems to be mainly made for the consoles, but now this stupid attitude just tipped me over the fence. There is no single "real" reason for being connected all of the time for a single player game. I rarely play single player games, and when I do it's usually because Comcast fucked up or I am maxing out my bandwidth uploading/downloading and MP games lag like crazy.

All this is gonna do is give people more of an excuse to pirate. But we as consumers (you know, the whole point to a consumer market is for getting what WE want, not what the companies want, or why else even have consumerism and just go with full fledged socialism to make it official) have the power to get what we want and that is to not buy the shit that they keep trying to force down out throats. It's really that simple. Have petitions, post in forums, and don't buy the game, and list the reasons why you aren't buying the game and eventually they will relent.
 
cageymaru said:
Let me rephrase it in a less confrontational way; why shouldn't there be an offline mode for single player games like it has been since the 1980's when I started PC gaming?
Click to expand...
I do think that this is a valid question to which publishers have only been responding "Why shouldn't you be playing SP in online more?"

What is the downside to having to be online to play? I don't have a reasonable answer to this other than the one in a billion "my internet is down and I want to play this now" scenario, or a page out of the anti-DRM zealots playbook which I don't consider reasonable answers. Consumers are online all the time anyway. I don't know anyone who doesn't have Cable or DSL and no one I know disconnects their modem/router when the Internet connection is not in use.

What is the benefit of having to be online to play? The obvious benefit is simple DRM. However, let's try and look beyond that, what other benefits could there possibly be? For current games there probably are not a whole lot of benefits.

For future games you can dream up all kinds of possibilities:
- real time weather data integrated into the game (much like MS Flight Sim X currently already does)
- location specific environment (the plot of the game is the same, the environment is loaded from Google 3D maps to match your city)
- location specific advertisement (instead of seeing fake ads (i.e. Pisswasser in GTA4) in your game you see real ads that match your location)
- consumer behavior tracking (which level was frustrating that had to be reloaded by many players over an over, which area displayed a glitch, which area did people spend the most time on because they may have liked looking around.
- staggered content delivery (got a capped data plan? no need to download 20GB just to get started, download 2GB to play the first chapter of the game, download the rest when you need it or in the background, like EQ2 does now)

There are a lot of possible benefits one can think of just as soon as one steps off of the anti-DRM bandwagon.

Buxaroo said:
I am sorry, the whole point to capitalism is for the consumer.
Click to expand...
Not sure what commie school you went to ;) but capitalism even has capital in the term, it's not about the consumer but about profit maximization. This means giving the consumer as little as possible but as much as necessary for their money.
 
Thuleman said:
I do think that this is a valid question to which publishers have only been responding "Why shouldn't you be playing SP in online more?"

What is the downside to having to be online to play? I don't have a reasonable answer to this other than the one in a billion "my internet is down and I want to play this now" scenario, or a page out of the anti-DRM zealots playbook which I don't consider reasonable answers. Consumers are online all the time anyway. I don't know anyone who doesn't have Cable or DSL and no one I know disconnects their modem/router when the Internet connection is not in use.

What is the benefit of having to be online to play? The obvious benefit is simple DRM. However, let's try and look beyond that, what other benefits could there possibly be? For current games there probably are not a whole lot of benefits.

For future games you can dream up all kinds of possibilities:
- real time weather data integrated into the game (much like MS Flight Sim X currently already does)
- location specific environment (the plot of the game is the same, the environment is loaded from Google 3D maps to match your city)
- location specific advertisement (instead of seeing fake ads (i.e. Pisswasser in GTA4) in your game you see real ads that match your location)
- consumer behavior tracking (which level was frustrating that had to be reloaded by many players over an over, which area displayed a glitch, which area did people spend the most time on because they may have liked looking around.
- staggered content delivery (got a capped data plan? no need to download 20GB just to get started, download 2GB to play the first chapter of the game, download the rest when you need it or in the background, like EQ2 does now)

There are a lot of possible benefits one can think of just as soon as one steps off of the anti-DRM bandwagon.
Click to expand...

All good points and I agree with them. But lets be real here, most companies don't have this on their mind and it's just an excuse to keep fighting their anti piracy war (similar to the war on drugs, waste of time and won't work now has it worked) and will be a future way for them to market to you in some form or another. iD I actually trust a bit more than other companies, but most don't give a damn about innovation or giving the customer anymore than they have to.
 
Thuleman said:
I do think that this is a valid question to which publishers have only been responding "Why shouldn't you be playing SP in online more?"

What is the downside to having to be online to play? I don't have a reasonable answer to this other than the one in a billion "my internet is down and I want to play this now" scenario, or a page out of the anti-DRM zealots playbook which I don't consider reasonable answers. Consumers are online all the time anyway. I don't know anyone who doesn't have Cable or DSL and no one I know disconnects their modem/router when the Internet connection is not in use.

What is the benefit of having to be online to play? The obvious benefit is simple DRM. However, let's try and look beyond that, what other benefits could there possibly be? For current games there probably are not a whole lot of benefits.

For future games you can dream up all kinds of possibilities:
- real time weather data integrated into the game (much like MS Flight Sim X currently already does)
- location specific environment (the plot of the game is the same, the environment is loaded from Google 3D maps to match your city)
- location specific advertisement (instead of seeing fake ads (i.e. Pisswasser in GTA4) in your game you see real ads that match your location)
- consumer behavior tracking (which level was frustrating that had to be reloaded by many players over an over, which area displayed a glitch, which area did people spend the most time on because they may have liked looking around.
- staggered content delivery (got a capped data plan? no need to download 20GB just to get started, download 2GB to play the first chapter of the game, download the rest when you need it or in the background, like EQ2 does now)

There are a lot of possible benefits one can think of just as soon as one steps off of the anti-DRM bandwagon.


Not sure what commie school you went to ;) but capitalism even has capital in the term, it's not about the consumer but about profit maximization. This means giving the consumer as little as possible but as much as necessary for their money.
Click to expand...

I misspoke. What I meant was the benefits for the consumer. If there are no benefits to consumers, whats the point? If we get less than what we did beforehand, whats the point in it all? We have too many apologists for the companies point of view, but not enough for the consumer who is forking over the moneys' point of view. It should be a buyers market, and in actuality is, but like everything else today, it's getting skewered and corrupted. And people are becoming sheep and just accepting things that are detrimental to their own good. Similar to people voting people in who don't have their well being in mind, only for the companies who shell out the most cash ;)
 
Thuleman said:
*snip*
Click to expand...
One other big disadvantage is removing control from the gamer. Lets not be naive here, online is for DRM partly, removing the second hand market partly and pushing further sales of DLC by reducing ganer options.

real time weather data integrated into the game (much like MS Flight Sim X currently already does)
- location specific environment (the plot of the game is the same, the environment is loaded from Google 3D maps to match your city)
- location specific advertisement (instead of seeing fake ads (i.e. Pisswasser in GTA4) in your game you see real ads that match your location)
- consumer behavior tracking (which level was frustrating that had to be reloaded by many players over an over, which area displayed a glitch, which area did people spend the most time on because they may have liked looking around.
- staggered content delivery (got a capped data plan? no need to download 20GB just to get started, download 2GB to play the first chapter of the game, download the rest when you need it or in the background, like EQ2
Click to expand...

Who gives a fuck about real life weather in games outside of a couple of simulators. You mentioned earlie about catering to a minority, that's a TINY minority.

Location specific advertising? Why the fuck do I want advertising in the game I just paid $50-60 for? GTA fake advertising was ironic that's what was good about it. I don't want to be walking through hyrule and have a coke ad, about the only games I want advertising in is racing sims, and then I want realistic advertising not location specific shit.

Consumer behaviour tracking? Great, so we can have a bunch of generic games, just what I wanted, another dozen CoD clones. If a dev needs behavior tracking to see what I want, I don't want whatever shit they're selling.

Staggered content delivery? You mean like when you play offline and can choose when you download and install patches? :p

None of the shit you're talking about seems advantageous to me.
 
This is the first time I wished I had a twitter account so that I can tweet to Tim..FUCK YOU!
 
Indie studios are gonna start booming if this happens, me i have good internet and with a 250GB cap im ok cause i don't download a ton of stuff and don't stream netflix or hulu too much, i accept it for what it is because game companies are goin to change their stand on this until they see a mass revolt and serious game sales dropping.
 
Tudz said:
Location specific advertising? Why the fuck do I want advertising in the game I just paid $50-60 for? GTA fake advertising was ironic that's what was good about it.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. Sadly this is one of the mostly likely things I can imagine publishers wanting to use the always-on connection for, especially in shooters.
 
Dan_D said:
Anyone ever have their internet connection go out and all you've got to do in order to pass the time until the repairman gets there is play games. How can you do that if everything goes to an always connected model?

That's a bunch of crap.
Click to expand...

Not in the last 5 years at least. If it did happen I would tether my phone.
 
Thuleman said:
I do think that this is a valid question to which publishers have only been responding "Why shouldn't you be playing SP in online more?"

What is the downside to having to be online to play? I don't have a reasonable answer to this other than the one in a billion "my internet is down and I want to play this now" scenario, or a page out of the anti-DRM zealots playbook which I don't consider reasonable answers. Consumers are online all the time anyway. I don't know anyone who doesn't have Cable or DSL and no one I know disconnects their modem/router when the Internet connection is not in use.

What is the benefit of having to be online to play? The obvious benefit is simple DRM. However, let's try and look beyond that, what other benefits could there possibly be? For current games there probably are not a whole lot of benefits.

For future games you can dream up all kinds of possibilities:
- real time weather data integrated into the game (much like MS Flight Sim X currently already does)
- location specific environment (the plot of the game is the same, the environment is loaded from Google 3D maps to match your city)
- location specific advertisement (instead of seeing fake ads (i.e. Pisswasser in GTA4) in your game you see real ads that match your location)
- consumer behavior tracking (which level was frustrating that had to be reloaded by many players over an over, which area displayed a glitch, which area did people spend the most time on because they may have liked looking around.
- staggered content delivery (got a capped data plan? no need to download 20GB just to get started, download 2GB to play the first chapter of the game, download the rest when you need it or in the background, like EQ2 does now)

There are a lot of possible benefits one can think of just as soon as one steps off of the anti-DRM bandwagon.


Not sure what commie school you went to ;) but capitalism even has capital in the term, it's not about the consumer but about profit maximization. This means giving the consumer as little as possible but as much as necessary for their money.
Click to expand...

Well for me living in North Carolina I fit into the "pathetic internet only available in my area". I have temporarily moved to an are that has 30mb Time Warner Cable while my home is being repaired. Since July 7th my internet has been down 5 times for maintenance, and 1 time for the drunk driver that ran into the telephone pole yesterday.

My phone is a cable phone, so I had to purchase a cellphone for the first time in 12 years. Cellphones don't work where I normally live at so it was pointless to own one before. Well it would be pointless to own one here but the cable is constantly under maintenance.

When I move back home hopefully by this winter, I will be back on my $100 a month 784Kbps DSL as there isn't any other forms of internet within a one hour drive of my area. There is Fiber 100 feet from my home but it is for the public school that is next door to my home.

There are thousands of consumers in my area that have the exact same access as me. I think that a lot of people think that because they live in a city or suburb all of America is like that. Most of America doesn't have access to decent internet if you read the federal reports from the FCC. And there are a lot of us in this area that buy PC and console games as we get bored looking at the crops grow. We even have a guy that builds custom PC's out of his shop for the local University. The University has Fiber; houses surrounding it have craptastic DSL or the previously mentioned TW Cable. Any further out and you're relelgated to Dial Up.

So when developers and consumers start bragging about how everyone has equal access, it just isn't true. My taxes subsidize public projects for our towns and cities, yet I'm told repeatedly that my area's population density is too low. We have enough people to meet the demand for better internet, but they are spread out. Thus reliable internet isn't available.

Until we can conquer those type problems, developers need to find a better way to incorporate DRM or risk losing a large share of their market like SC2. Yes it was considered a hit, but I know tons of people who didn't buy it in my area because of the always online requirement. Maybe a few hundred sales here and there doesn't matter to Blizzard or ID Software, but that's up to them and their bottom line. I just know it doesn't affect the crackers as they were playing SC2 before it came out in stores. DRM is just added to games to make it more annoying for regular consumers to pirate games. Anyone that is tech savvy enough to type "crack game X" into Google is smarter than the DRM.

So why exclude a great deal of consumers from your titles? Then cry that pirates are destroying PC gaming. That's something that annoys me to no end as I can't purchase your games because they don't work in my area. I wish someone could explain that to developers in a way that they can comprehend.

Yes, I can fire up a MMO but I accept that at some point I'm going to get kicked from the server. I explain that to the guild I'm in and they accept that. 1500 ms that night I switch to something else. That's a good time to break out some single player titles. Seems that in the future that won't be an option unless I crack some exe's.
 
Can we please create a DRM/Nerdrage subforum, so we can go back to actually discussing games around here? :p
 
TwistedAegis said:
Can we please create a DRM/Nerdrage subforum, so we can go back to actually discussing games around here? :p
Click to expand...

You guys discuss the nerdrage just as much, or more, than the actual nerds raging. Well, besides Fail. Like I've said before, it really shouldn't bother Blizzard fans that some gamers like things a little different. It isn't like anyone is asking for Blizzard to change the formula of the game, they just want to be able to enjoy the game ALL the time, which means they probably like Blizzard games more than the shitdicks that go "LOL goe outsyde, you ediots".
 
The problem is every thread about games gets crapped on by the same people. Every active thread is about the same thing. I guess it shows thats what people really want to talk about, which is fine, but I've been coming around less and less due to it.
 
The thing that pisses me off is how they try to spin this as "good for the gamer" when it is really all about control on their end. At least own up to what you are doing.
 
Forceman said:
The thing that pisses me off is how they try to spin this as "good for the gamer" when it is really all about control on their end. At least own up to what you are doing.
Click to expand...

ngbbs445656af17e6f.jpg
 
oh boy.... this is gonna get messy....
what kind of bullshit.... did tim open his mouth, or his ass? what a mess......
 
cageymaru said:
These developers are forgetting that this is a hobby we choose to support; and not a requirement for living or happiness.
Click to expand...

They didn't forget this. They know this is the case. What they know is that Gamers have forgotten this. There's a reason they chose Diablo 3 to push this scheme. They know it is crack to gamers. They know they can't resist it. Hence, their actions.

The right franchise is like a drug now. People can't help but buy the latest crack Diablo or CoD, no matter how many times they've stomped on the package.
 
Tudz said:
One other big disadvantage is removing control from the gamer. Lets not be naive here, online is for DRM partly, removing the second hand market partly and pushing further sales of DLC by reducing gamer options.
Click to expand...
Steam has been in business for years, remains highly profitable, and apart from the occasional user-error induced emo-rage customer satisfaction is incredibly high. Steam doesn't allow for a second-hand market but they make up for that by offering games at substantial discounts if you don't need a Day 1 purchase.

Tudz said:
Location specific advertising? Why the fuck do I want advertising in the game I just paid $50-60 for?
Click to expand...
Let's start by saying that it's user-error that you paid $50-$60 and continue to say that you will be subjected to advertising no matter what. The difference will be global or national brands vs more localized and perhaps interest specific ads.

Tudz said:
Consumer behaviour tracking? [...] If a dev needs behavior tracking to see what I want, I don't want whatever shit they're selling.
Click to expand...
Now that you have calmed down a little and read over what you wrote it probably doesn't even makes sense to you anymore.

I, as consumer, want companies to provide me with goods and services that I want. I don't want companies to have to guess what I want. Ideally I want to be able to say "here is what I want" and they will give me just that. If it takes an always-on connection and non-personal data collection to help them develop products which are closer to what I want then I am OK with that. Why wouldn't I be.

Tudz said:
Staggered content delivery? You mean like when you play offline and can choose when you download and install patches? :p
Click to expand...
Nope, I meant exactly what I wrote and illustrated with the example I gave, it's just that you didn't bother to read it or were unable to comprehend it.
 
TwistedAegis said:
The problem is every thread about games gets crapped on by the same people. Every active thread is about the same thing. I guess it shows thats what people really want to talk about, which is fine, but I've been coming around less and less due to it.
Click to expand...

Nah, it's because there are like 8 threads about this subject alone. About 7 on the EA Origins deal. Hmm, maybe a nerdrage subforum would be better...

There are always going to be people bickering when it comes to the top of the top in mainstream games, look at BF3 vs. MW3.

People have been waiting for D3, the sequel to "the best game evar", for over a decade. They want it to be just right, just like people on the Bioware boards wan't their Tali nude fantasy to disgust and arouse them at the same time.
 
Thuleman said:
I, as consumer, want companies to provide me with goods and services that I want. I don't want companies to have to guess what I want. Ideally I want to be able to say "here is what I want" and they will give me just that. If it takes an always-on connection and non-personal data collection to help them develop products which are closer to what I want then I am OK with that. Why wouldn't I be.
Click to expand...

How many times have gamers come out and said "Here, this is what i want" and been completely ignored?

This is another example of them calling their actions one thing while implementing it for another. They could give a fuck about what you want. They're spying on you isn't for making a product better for you, it's always about making more money for them.
 
chockomonkey said:
This is another example of them calling their actions one thing while implementing it for another. They could give a fuck about what you want. They're spying on you isn't for making a product better for you, it's always about making more money for them.
Click to expand...
First of all, I was talking potential future uses for always-on. As far as I know no current game is collecting data on gamers and sending it home.

As for not caring what I want, that makes no sense, if they don't make what I want I don't buy it. Simple as that. The CoD series made a lot of money but I can honestly say that I didn't buy a single one of them, not even at bargain prices. That product is not what I want, but millions of other consumers wanted it. CoD publishers provide products people want.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
You guys discuss the nerdrage just as much, or more, than the actual nerds raging. Well, besides Fail. Like I've said before, it really shouldn't bother Blizzard fans that some gamers like things a little different. It isn't like anyone is asking for Blizzard to change the formula of the game, they just want to be able to enjoy the game ALL the time, which means they probably like Blizzard games more than the shitdicks that go "LOL goe outsyde, you ediots".
Click to expand...

Exactly. I love Blizzard games but I have accepted that I can't play the newest single player ones due to the DRM. Which is cool with me now as I just ignore them on store shelves and online retailers. But Blizzard keeps emailing me about how I was such a loyal customer of their's and how I should try the new games.

I wish I could speak to their upper management about how they changed their delivery method and excluded me and my friends around me. Since I can't play, friends and family that do have really stable connections don't want to buy it either because I'm not going to be online with them. 90% of the fun is being on Skype and laughing at my nephew for falling down a hole or standing in the fire, then trying to get past it and doing the same. The social aspects are what we're actually paying for; not the game per say. Which is a shame since we would like to support their next title with sales from Diablo 3 and SC2.

But that's the nature of the beast; Developer vs Pirate. It's a game of Tug-O-War with the only loser the consumer that actually buys the titles. And I blame the person that implements the DRM that blocks me from playing as it is their call for what type they use.
 
Thuleman said:
First of all, I was talking potential future uses for always-on. As far as I know no current game is collecting data on gamers and sending it home.

As for not caring what I want, that makes no sense, if they don't make what I want I don't buy it. Simple as that. The CoD series made a lot of money but I can honestly say that I didn't buy a single one of them, not even at bargain prices. That product is not what I want, but millions of other consumers wanted it. CoD publishers provide products people want.
Click to expand...

I should have gone back to Tudz' OP before chiming into that conversation. If there was a game which was monitoring gamer stats and sending it home, I doubt it would be the sort of data we'd care about. Instead they would come back with something like, "only 20% of our users used X feature, so we're removing it"

There's a thin line needed to be drawn here though. You can't say that because people buy CoD, that the developers care what people want and therefor produce that.

I'd say that CoD sells regardless and they know this. You think any of the re-itterations of CoD were to give the customer what they want? if so, we'd see them polling the community for features they want added and shit. Not what they've done.

I maintain, devs don't give a fuck what we want, they care about what sells. You gotta think of these franchises like drugs. Activision has stepped on their once pure-grade CoD package time and time and time again, but because they no longer have the best product on the street (they stop supporting their old games and let them go to shit), all the junkies are more than happy to shell out more money to get their fix.
 
Ruoh said:
Actually, no, I have medical care to authorize. Thanks for assuming though!
Click to expand...

I ran two marathons today, mowed 25 acres with a push mower, fucked 6 super models, and later this afternoon I'm going to be working out that whole peace in the middle east thing. Oh, and since I don't waste any time I also performed life saving surgery on three infants during my lunch break.
 
Thuleman said:
First of all, I was talking potential future uses for always-on. As far as I know no current game is collecting data on gamers and sending it home.

As for not caring what I want, that makes no sense, if they don't make what I want I don't buy it. Simple as that. The CoD series made a lot of money but I can honestly say that I didn't buy a single one of them, not even at bargain prices. That product is not what I want, but millions of other consumers wanted it. CoD publishers provide products people want.
Click to expand...

But couldn't they do it like 2K games does with their sports titles? If it detects an internet connection then it automatically gives you the latest rosters, latest patch, online play option. I think up to date weather and other suggestions are welcomed also. If it doesn't detect an internet connection you can play the game as is without the bells and whistles.

When I try to go online and it wants to check to make sure my copy is legit I have no issues with that either. But I like having the ability to play when there's no internet available.
 
Why don't they stop lying and say what they mean - the only reason is to stop piracy.
 
I have a feeling by the time the next generation of hardware comes out I won't have any practical use for it if things continue the way they are. :(
 
Ya, once internet is charged by the mb / gig, i dont want it always on....

i love how he acts like steam isnt already doing this and some how Blizzard is the inventor of providing updates and such with out bothering the gamer....

clueless
 
I used to put much stock in what ID had to say, but since they haven't had a good game come out in like 10 years, I really don't care these days :)
 
If you treat everyone like a pirate, everyone will have no choice but to pirate.

All the content owners (movies, music, games) need to get that through their thick greedy skulls. There is not a shred of evidence that piracy results is lost sales, all they want is more control and repeated payments for the same content.
 
Only thing I can see good with always online is that you 'could' automatically add in content \ bug fixes etc while the player is playing.

But it won't be used for that.
 
michael.pa2 said:
What exactly has iD done in recent years that I should care what they think? If Rage actually turns out to be good,it'll be the first in ages. I don't understand people who treat every word that comes out of Carmack's mouth as gospel.
Click to expand...
This quote didn't come from Carmack, and I'll bet anything that Carmack would disagree with always-online DRM.

Carmack is the Steve Wozniak of the gaming world. He's the influential brain that you never see, not the less-talented businessman like Steve Jobs. He's very pro-humanity and pro-knowledge. He likes the money he's made, but he loves his craft more than his money.

Open sourcing his older engines have had a HUGE influence on the gaming industry. A lot of new game programmers cut their teeth on his source code, learning how things work and how to code a game. His legacy will last years, maybe decades, because he shares his knowledge and others build on it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top