EA Announces Expansion of Its Always Online DRM Policy

F

Final8ty

Gawd
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
1,001
Electronic Arts’ policy of requiring its users to always be online when playing their games is going to continue but with a twist, confirmed Keith Ramsdale, the general manager of EA Northern Europe.

This new version of the always online requirement will feature the implementation of “online universes,” which will emphasize an always-online connection to resources on EA’s servers.



Ramsdale explained the new vision for EA’s always online policy.

Imagine a player gets up in the morning, plays an online match on his 360 before going to work. On the bus, on his way to work, he practices his free kicks on his tablet. At lunch he looks at the transfer window on his PC. On the way home he chooses his kit on his smartphone.

Here’s the thing: when he gets home to play again on his 360 that evening, all those achievements and upgrades will be alive in his game. We’re very focused on transforming all of our brands into these online universes. That gives the consumer full control of how and when they play in a rich world of content.

The new policy will be extended to all of EA’s franchises, including FIFA, Battlefield, Medal of Honor, The Sims, Need for Speed, and Star Wars games, among others.

Ramsdale did not give a timeframe for this policy change.

Analysis: Gaming’s a big business now, and that means that the stakes of piracy are much higher. For example, Crysis 2, last year’s most pirated game, reported an estimated 3,920,000 pirated copies, resulting in approximately $235,200,000 of lost income. Of course, it’s difficult to aggregate what percentage of pirates are actual lost customers, but when you’re losing $235 million dollars on a game from piracy, it doesn’t really matter anymore. The fact of the matter is that, even if only 10% of pirates were actual lost customers, then you’re still losing a painful $23 million due to piracy.

Crysis 2 wasn’t an anomaly, either. In 2011, games like Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, Battlefield 3, FIFA 12, and Portal 2 all recorded estimate piracy levels of over 3 million copies, and it’s important to note that three of those games are titles that EA published.

So I think the message here is clear. Piracy is a real, veritable concern to any publisher releasing high-profile AAA games for the PC. Therefore, EA has a right and a business duty to be worried about piracy and to try and think of ways to fix this issue.

Now, before you all get your pitchforks and torches and storm my house saying that I’m pro-DRM, let me state for the record that I think, unequivocally, that EA’s always online policy is draconian, misguided, and repulsive. It’s a prime example of taking the wrong route of DRM; it’s punishing all of their players because of pirates rather than rewarding the paying customers for their patronage. It’s bad; it doesn’t work; it frustrates real customers; and I think that, ironically, it’s contributing to the piracy of their games rather than helping to correct the issue.

As such, when I hear of this new development in EA’s DRM policy, I can’t help but feel that this is one step forward and two steps back. On the one hand, EA is actually trying to ease the pain of the always online requirement by adding helpful and customer-positive features to it such as cross-platforming and cloud saving. However, in the process of doing this, EA not only misses the point again on why their DRM sucks, they also go in yet another completely misguided direction by taking away even more game ownership from customers. With this new policy, EA is not only continuing but expanding their practice of making customers jump through hoop after hoop to gain the content they paid for, and those who do brave the obstacles are being rewarded with less actual ownership of that content. You know what that means: customers are going to grow tired and frustrated with the draconian DRM and look to piracy to try and circumvent all the hassle. It’s a vicious cycle, isn’t it?

The fact of the matter is that you don’t “beat piracy,” and if that’s how you approach the issue, then you’re just going to frustrate everybody and get nowhere. What you really need to do is encourage people to be legitimate customers rather than pirates, and EA’s new policy most certainly does not attempt this in any shape or form.

Ultimately, I’m disheartened to hear this news. If EA keeps up the pace with their attempts to bludgeon users into buying and using the game exactly how the company wants, then I think their future with the PC market might be pretty bleak.
Click to expand...

http://www.gamingbus.com/2012/04/23/ea-announces-expansion-online-drm-policy/
 
Good luck , because it worked out so well for Ubisoft :rolleyes:

Its like part of EA is being run by people who at least attempt to appease the audience they cater to. And the other part can't even see straight without pie charts showing how to maximize profit "margins" and continues to approve boneheaded choices like this.

DRM does not work..
 
Well at least they're trying a carrot with the stick this time...adding (well, potentially) actual value to the persistent online presence.
 
Dion said:
Another form of DRM.. that doesn't work 100% either.

All DRM should be dropped.. from every game.
Click to expand...

Sure, and we should all wear flowers in our hair and sing kumbaya...but it ain't happening. Steam has been great, nothing easier than just redownloading a game when I reformat or just want to pick something up again. And you know what, Origins has worked well for me too.
 
TwistedAegis said:
Sure, and we should all wear flowers in our hair and sing kumbaya...but it ain't happening. Steam has been great, nothing easier than just redownloading a game when I reformat or just want to pick something up again. And you know what, Origins has worked well for me too.
Click to expand...

I think his point is that Steam works in-spite of its DRM, not because of it. Really, you agree with that position. You like Steam because it works well for you, the convenience and so on. You don't like it because of the Steamworks DRM. They could jettison that and you'd be just as happy.

DRM is a paper tiger, it doesn't do shit to prevent piracy. At best, it does nothing, it stays out of the way and doesn't piss off legit customers and drive them off. At worst, it loses sales (like in Ubisoft's case, there are two titles I would have bought form them but for their DRM). It clearly doesn't prevent piracy, you've only to look at a torrent site to see that.

I also believe DRM should go away. Companies should realize that you can't stop piracy, and the answer is not to waste resources trying. Rather have good services like Steam that people will use to get things legitimately.
 
That gives the consumer full control of how and when they play in a rich world of conten
Click to expand...

Does that "full" control include the ability to play while offline? Or is it actually not full, and is actually purposefully limiting?
 
I guess EA is going to needlessly go down the same road Ubisoft has.

It's like a number of these companies are in business to lose money with some of these decisions. That's not a comment confined to gaming, either.
 
Sycraft said:
I think his point is that Steam works in-spite of its DRM, not because of it. Really, you agree with that position. You like Steam because it works well for you, the convenience and so on. You don't like it because of the Steamworks DRM. They could jettison that and you'd be just as happy.

DRM is a paper tiger, it doesn't do shit to prevent piracy. At best, it does nothing, it stays out of the way and doesn't piss off legit customers and drive them off. At worst, it loses sales (like in Ubisoft's case, there are two titles I would have bought form them but for their DRM). It clearly doesn't prevent piracy, you've only to look at a torrent site to see that.

I also believe DRM should go away. Companies should realize that you can't stop piracy, and the answer is not to waste resources trying. Rather have good services like Steam that people will use to get things legitimately.
Click to expand...

Fully agree. The solution isn't ever "make it worse" which is what many publishers seem to be thinking.

Offering up content , easily available and competitively priced on a service like Steam and you can make it more appealing than downloading a torrent that might get you a warning from your ISP and at worst land you in court.
 
That's great until they shut down your game and you can't play what you paid for anymore because they didn't want to maintain the servers.
 
Honestly, most games that come out these days aren't worth playing a second time anyway. Buy it at $5, play it, and forget about it. When I want to replay a game, I almost always go back to a game from pre-2005.
 
so what if I want to play BF3 on my PC but my kids want to play something on the Xbox 360 and the accounts are "linked".

Does it try to kick me off the PC?
 
Sir, we are partially inserted.

Are they accepting it?

Some sir, but our trolls are causing them to squabble amongst themselves and forget how much pain this is causing them.

Good, continue pushing. We are on schedule to have the tip reach the other side and directly inserted into their wallet in record time.
 
TwistedAegis said:
Sure, and we should all wear flowers in our hair and sing kumbaya...but it ain't happening. Steam has been great, nothing easier than just redownloading a game when I reformat or just want to pick something up again. And you know what, Origins has worked well for me too.
Click to expand...

Not sure you understand what DRM is. Its to prevent piracy. All of the DRMs have failed. Hense why they should all be removed.

Steam and Origin work great as services (DRM aside). And I enjoy them both. But they fail at DRM.. Like every other form of it. So adding useless online internet check is pointless.
 
ugggg, this makes me want to be a pirate, just so I don't have to put up with their stuff. I don't need my saves or achievements on a cloud.
 
The right way to do this is turn it on for the first year or so, and then turn it off when the game is below $20. I get that there are edge cases, but I would personally be happy if they followed this model.

I bought Splinter Cell Conviction in a pretty good sale. Now I'm watching patiently to see if they do turn off the DRM, or they turn off the game. If they turn off the game, I'll probably never buy anything from them again that's over $10.
 
Funny, retailers lose billions to theft every year, but they don't make you undergo a strip search as you exit their stores. If you buy their games, you deserve the punishment they are giving you. I just hope someone manages to mod FIFA so you can used "acquired" copies to play online.
 
Dethred said:
Funny, retailers lose billions to theft every year, but they don't make you undergo a strip search as you exit their stores. If you buy their games, you deserve the punishment they are giving you. I just hope someone manages to mod FIFA so you can used "acquired" copies to play online.
Click to expand...

You know what? Post like this DON'T FUCKING HELP! By all means don't buy the games but don't fucking pirate them either. All it does it make you an perfect example for these companies to keep up this bullshit. If you want it to stop stop being a god damn enabler of it.
 
Sycraft said:
I also believe DRM should go away. Companies should realize that you can't stop piracy, and the answer is not to waste resources trying.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with that. Publishers need to go out of their way to prevent/stop piracy. DRM is and has always been a bad idea and doesn't work.

Cannot wait for the headline about undercover agents busting a big lan like Quakecon.
 
Dion said:
Not sure you understand what DRM is. Its to prevent piracy. All of the DRMs have failed. Hense why they should all be removed.

Steam and Origin work great as services (DRM aside). And I enjoy them both. But they fail at DRM.. Like every other form of it. So adding useless online internet check is pointless.
Click to expand...

DRM does not prevent piracy, and they know it before they even put it into practice.

They tries to get in control of second hand market.
 
shansoft said:
DRM does not prevent piracy, and they know it before they even put it into practice.

They tries to get in control of second hand market.
Click to expand...

The PC doesn't have a second hand market, it has never had anything resembling one. It's more about controlling access.
 
Derangel said:
The PC doesn't have a second hand market, it has never had anything resembling one. It's more about controlling access.
Click to expand...

They do have it......

It just PC platform is much more easier to control than consoles with limitation for publishers, and those analyst loves making data for future decision.

Remember how EA limiting multiplayer for BF on consoles? ;)
They are just starting to practice on what they did on PC to consoles now...
 
Is there a TL: DR version? :p

This guy doesn't get the concept of making a point quickly.

But the "policy" doesn't make sense as most of those games, don't have the requirement. Or it might do. He rambles lots.
 
Last edited:
The measuring stick isn't whether or not any DRM is 100% foolproof - it is how it effects the margins. I would say Steam is near the perfect balance - easy enough and cost effective enough to make pirating many of the games on it pointless except for those who just get a kick out of it or are so broke they wouldn't buy the games anyway.

It isn't so much whether it CAN be cracked, but creating the "hoops" to go through to stop X% of users from doing so. Say a game sells 1M copies. Just moving that percentage from say, 10% of users pirate it to 8% equals anywhere from $2M to $6M, depending on sticker price. That is absolutely significant and just that 2% could make or break a smaller studio. I'm not one of those that think every downloaded copy is a lost sale - I would say it is a probably less than 50% or perhaps even much lower - but it is still absolutly a signficant loss amount for studios.
 
Wow what a terrible article. It can be summed up as "<offensive statement>, no offense."

I mean really, why the fuck is he listing the best-selling PC game of all time (MW3) as an example of "rampant piracy." What a scumbag.

From Wiki: "Within 24 hours of going on sale, the game sold 6.5 million copies in the U.S. and UK alone and grossed $400 million, making it the biggest entertainment launch of all time."

OH NOES THE PIRATES ARE RUINING YOUR AAA PROFITS!!! BETTER SUPPORT IMPLEMENTATION OF MORE RESTRICTIVE DRM!!! :rolleyes:

Sorry EA, but I'm done. I'm not even going to pirate one of your piece of shit games again (and I haven't in quite a while).
 
There is no way they can stop piracy. They've been trying for over a decade and they can't do it.

The only thing we should be talking about is how it's screwing over paying customers.
 
TwistedAegis said:
The measuring stick isn't whether or not any DRM is 100% foolproof - it is how it effects the margins. I would say Steam is near the perfect balance - easy enough and cost effective enough to make pirating many of the games on it pointless except for those who just get a kick out of it or are so broke they wouldn't buy the games anyway.

It isn't so much whether it CAN be cracked, but creating the "hoops" to go through to stop X% of users from doing so. Say a game sells 1M copies. Just moving that percentage from say, 10% of users pirate it to 8% equals anywhere from $2M to $6M, depending on sticker price. That is absolutely significant and just that 2% could make or break a smaller studio. I'm not one of those that think every downloaded copy is a lost sale - I would say it is a probably less than 50% or perhaps even much lower - but it is still absolutly a signficant loss amount for studios.
Click to expand...

I am curious how making consumers going through extra hoops also causes the pirates to go through extra hoops too, am I missing something?
 
TwistedAegis said:
It isn't so much whether it CAN be cracked, but creating the "hoops" to go through to stop X% of users from doing so. Say a game sells 1M copies.
Click to expand...

Doesn't work like that. Thing is one guy cracks it and then that cracked version is distributed to everyone else. No hoops. Yes the cracker has to crack it but that is easier than people might imagine. Part of the problem is simply that DRM is reused, the same programs are used on many games. Well that means each subsequent crack is easier since you know what sort of thing to look for. Doing a custom implementation per game isn't feasible due to the massive cost of implementation and it'd STILL get cracked.

It really doesn't do any good and of course it isn't zero sum. It costs money to implement and support, and most cost licensing too (Steamworks is free but things like SecuROM are not and cost per copy sold), not to mention people refusing to buy.

Just moving that percentage from say, 10% of users pirate it to 8% equals anywhere from $2M to $6M, depending on sticker price. That is absolutely significant and just that 2% could make or break a smaller studio. I'm not one of those that think every downloaded copy is a lost sale - I would say it is a probably less than 50% or perhaps even much lower - but it is still absolutly a signficant loss amount for studios.
Click to expand...

Prove it. You are talking out your ass. You claim to know the conversion number but I don't believe you have any data backing it up. So let's see it then. If you've data, please link the study if you don't then no you can't go making the claim it is a significant loss because you've no idea.

I am aware of only one proper independent scientific study on the matter, and it was on music piracy, but it found no link (study here) between piracy and CD sales.
 
Imagine a player gets up in the morning, plays an online match on his 360 before going to work. On the bus, on his way to work, he practices his free kicks on his tablet. At lunch he looks at the transfer window on his PC. On the way home he chooses his kit on his smartphone.

Here’s the thing: when he gets home to play again on his 360 that evening, all those achievements and upgrades will be alive in his game.
Click to expand...

And his soul will be dead, having been sucked out through his eyeballs, achievement by achievement, by the vampiric lords of the video games marketing industry.

Does this Orwellish nightmare not make your blood run cold?
 
evilsofa said:
And his soul will be dead, having been sucked out through his eyeballs, achievement by achievement, by the vampiric lords of the video games marketing industry.

Does this Orwellish nightmare not make your blood run cold?
Click to expand...

It's pretty insulting to 1984 to compare it to the bloody game industry. There are far bigger examples of it.
 
EA now means Enhanced Arsenic to me completely. They have become a poisonous blight to the gaming industry & gamers who want the very best for their gaming systems.
 
Derangel said:
The PC doesn't have a second hand market, it has never had anything resembling one. It's more about controlling access.
Click to expand...

I used to buy/sell plenty of used PC games, as well as lend to friends and family or borrow from them....so I am not sure on what basis you think your statement is correct.

As least where I live, about a decade ago pretty much every gaming specialty store used to have a section for used PC games. Hell, even video stores rented out PC games. And back then if it wasn't for the second hand market there was no way I could have ever afforded to play games such as wing commander, eye of the beholder, ultima, etc with the scraps of pocket money I earned doing chores around the house.

And when ebay gained prominence people would buy/sell used PC games online. I still have a used copy of Splintercell Chaos Theory which I acquired via ebay.

So yes, the PC no longer has second hand market for games anymore, but that is entirely attributable to online DRM.
 
defiant007 said:
I used to buy/sell plenty of used PC games, as well as lend to friends and family or borrow from them....so I am not sure on what basis you think your statement is correct.

As least where I live, about a decade ago pretty much every gaming specialty store used to have a section for used PC games. Hell, even video stores rented out PC games. And back then if it wasn't for the second hand market there was no way I could have ever afforded to play games such as wing commander, eye of the beholder, ultima, etc with the scraps of pocket money I earned doing chores around the house.

And when ebay gained prominence people would buy/sell used PC games online. I still have a used copy of Splintercell Chaos Theory which I acquired via ebay.

So yes, the PC no longer has second hand market for gamesanymore, but that is entirely attributable to online DRM.
Click to expand...

That isn't a market. Are you really trying to imply that a few people selling games to friends or on Ebay is the same thing as Gamestop or Best Buy selling used console games? There has never been a PC used MARKET. I used that word for a very specific reason.
 
Parmenides said:
I am curious how making consumers going through extra hoops also causes the pirates to go through extra hoops too, am I missing something?
Click to expand...

Was wondering the same thing. I doubt pirates are not anywhere near as inconvenienced as I am having to put up with all the bullshit online checks, account creations, install deauthorisations, cd checks, dealing with online support thanks to broken DRM, etc.

Simply copy and paste the crack and you are good to go. Whenever this discussion raises its ugly head I always think of this humorous gif.....because its so fucking true.

GxzeV.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top