Why am I supposed to hate DRM?

When I visit my mom, I bring my computer and sometimes my xbox.

. . .

She does not have internet at her house. At all.

If DRM had its way, I'd not be able to play a game at my mother's house. 

AncientDozer

...and thats shows how uneducated u are!
Who cares if u have no internet...who should give a damn???

It is the DRM fault that u have no internet connection??? 

[QUOTE="AncientDozer"]

When I visit my mom, I bring my computer and sometimes my xbox.

. . .

She does not have internet at her house. At all.

If DRM had its way, I'd not be able to play a game at my mother's house. 

rhazzy

...and thats shows how uneducated u are!
Who cares if u have no internet...who should give a damn???

It is the DRM fault that u have no internet connection??? 

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="Lost-to-Apathy"]If I was a developer, I'd be doing what CD Project Red is doing. Any other developer would just be wasting their time and pointlessly pissing legitimate customers off. If someone really wants your game, they'll buy it. To be honest, I wouldn't even want a pirates money. They are degenerate pieces of crap, no better than common thieves. I don't see the point in forcing them to pay for my product. I'd much rather see them get hit by a truck.

Lost-to-Apathy

But you didn't read my example.  You get more profit that way which means people are still happy and buying ur games.

Like I said before, 98% of DRM works, and really if you look at it, only about 1% of gamers really look into DRM, the rest don't really care.

I don't like DRM, personally.

However, if some of you are getting tired of the tirade against DRM and how certain quarters are scoring sh*tloads of brownie points by publicly speaking out against DRM or saying this-and-that game is "not always-online", I understand.

To me, this outcry is becoming more and more of a fad - and fads always get exploited by game-makers. In the case of this one, that would be CD Projekt and its Good Old Games division.

Why do people still not realize that offline mode exists?

Seriously, someone implies that steam is an always online requirement for all their games, every single day, when the topic is brought up. 

Go to the "steam" menu at the top. Select "go offline". Now you're not connected, and you have full access to every single one of your games, unless they have their own, separate online requirement for whatever reason. 

If your internet goes down without you expecting it, just launch steam. It'll say "can't connect to servers. Would you like to start offline mode?". You hit "yes". You're in offline mode. 

It really is that simple.

the_bi99man

so most of the time i think steam is great but it does make you dependant on things that you shouldn't have to be dependant on when you want to just fire up a game real quick. i personally hope they will eventually move towards a system more like gog's. i can download an installer that is easier to back-up and i can play whenever and wherever i want.

i personally hope they will eventually move towards a system more like gog's. i can download an installer that is easier to back-up and i can play whenever and wherever i want.BLKR4330

I certainly prefer self-contained installer packages for my games - having an offline mode for loader clients still means having to use the loader client anyway.

However, BLKR4330, you may want to know that GOG does not always provide self-contained installer packages. GOG does not appear to vet its catalogue partners for that, so you can end up having an installer package that tries to download and install other software that the game requires to run on your computer. Purportedly, Fez was one such game.

[QUOTE="Lost-to-Apathy"]

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"] You say that now from a gamer's perspective but I assure u it would be different as a developer. Take an example: You create GAME1 without DRM. It gets pirated a lot, you earn 15% profit on it. You create GAME1: Part 2 with DRM. It gets pirated but you earn 35% profit on it. What are you going to do on Part 3? Especially when you have profit deadlines you need to meet from the publisher.FelipeInside

But you didn't read my example.  You get more profit that way which means people are still happy and buying ur games.

Like I said before, 98% of DRM works, and really if you look at it, only about 1% of gamers really look into DRM, the rest don't really care.

[QUOTE="wis3boi"]

[QUOTE="lawlessx"]

pics or it didn't happen :lol:

rhazzy

This is what happens to GTA boxed copies when you crack it or like in my case, the DRM just shits itself after owning the copy for a few years

Stop talking BS...i have the boxed copy since 03 December 2008(first day purchase)...and i have changed my PC 2 times since then...re-installed...no freaking problem.
The majority, which hate DRm has no clue about why they hate DRM in games...
How does the DRM directly affects you??

Human rights!!!
Animal rights!!!
Respect the Vegetarians!!!

Stop The Exploit of Planet Earth!!!
Have Fair Play!!!
Unicef is the best!!!

Captain Hook!!!!!!

What i wrote above is the argumentation of those which hate DRM...NONSENSE!!!

Talking BS when I showed you exactly what my copy did after the DRM stopped working? :lol: You're a goddamn joke

[QUOTE="AncientDozer"]

When I visit my mom, I bring my computer and sometimes my xbox.

. . .

She does not have internet at her house. At all.

If DRM had its way, I'd not be able to play a game at my mother's house.

rhazzy

...and thats shows how uneducated u are!
Who cares if u have no internet...who should give a damn???

It is the DRM fault that u have no internet connection???

:| Yes it is if it involves a game that shouldn't require a internet connection to begin with. Wtf kind of logic is that?

I don't like DRM, personally.

However, if some of you are getting tired of the tirade against DRM and how certain quarters are scoring sh*tloads of brownie points by publicly speaking out against DRM or saying this-and-that game is "not always-online", I understand.

To me, this outcry is becoming more and more of a fad - and fads always get exploited by game-makers. In the case of this one, that would be CD Projekt and its Good Old Games division.

Gelugon_baat

.......... Not sure where you were going with this.. Because your making it sound like this is a bad thing.. When it's a good thing..

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]

[QUOTE="Lost-to-Apathy"]I'm going to stick with number 1 and deal with it. I'd rather make people happy because at least they'll be back for my second game. There's no way to even prove that DRM = more sales.

kraken2109

But you didn't read my example.  You get more profit that way which means people are still happy and buying ur games.

Like I said before, 98% of DRM works, and really if you look at it, only about 1% of gamers really look into DRM, the rest don't really care.

[QUOTE="Gelugon_baat"]

I don't like DRM, personally.

However, if some of you are getting tired of the tirade against DRM and how certain quarters are scoring sh*tloads of brownie points by publicly speaking out against DRM or saying this-and-that game is "not always-online", I understand.

To me, this outcry is becoming more and more of a fad - and fads always get exploited by game-makers. In the case of this one, that would be CD Projekt and its Good Old Games division.

sSubZerOo

.......... Not sure where you were going with this.. Because your making it sound like this is a bad thing.. When it's a good thing..

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="Gelugon_baat"]

I don't like DRM, personally.

However, if some of you are getting tired of the tirade against DRM and how certain quarters are scoring sh*tloads of brownie points by publicly speaking out against DRM or saying this-and-that game is "not always-online", I understand.

To me, this outcry is becoming more and more of a fad - and fads always get exploited by game-makers. In the case of this one, that would be CD Projekt and its Good Old Games division.

FelipeInside

.......... Not sure where you were going with this.. Because your making it sound like this is a bad thing.. When it's a good thing..

:| This is a good thing if it means they are not using DRM.. By all means EXPLOIT this.

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

.......... Not sure where you were going with this.. Because your making it sound like this is a bad thing.. When it's a good thing..

sSubZerOo

:| This is a good thing if it means they are not using DRM.. By all means EXPLOIT this.

DRM IS EVIL

[QUOTE="Lost-to-Apathy"]

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]

That's a good point, but you have to understand that probably 98% of DRM works fine (I made that number up). And why would they remove a working DRM in the future? and how? Just means more work for them at the cost of breaking something (game stops working) and leaving an open game without DRM.

I understand ur against DRM (I see ur sig), but you need to put yourself on the developer side. 

FelipeInside

The problem with that analysis is that it's not accurate. Most publishers who have actually bothered to talk about it have reported that they see  less  sales and profits from games with super intrusive DRM. That's exactly why Ubisoft abandoned theirs, and patched it out of the games that already had it. And why EA has recently changed their stance, and called DRM a "failed, dead-end strategy". 

It just doesn't work. Period. Gamers know it. Pirates know it. Publishers know it. And they're slowly starting to admit it.

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="Lost-to-Apathy"]If I was a developer, I'd be doing what CD Project Red is doing. Any other developer would just be wasting their time and pointlessly pissing legitimate customers off. If someone really wants your game, they'll buy it. To be honest, I wouldn't even want a pirates money. They are degenerate pieces of crap, no better than common thieves. I don't see the point in forcing them to pay for my product. I'd much rather see them get hit by a truck.

the_bi99man

The problem with that analysis is that it's not accurate. Most publishers who have actually bothered to talk about it have reported that they see  less  sales and profits from games with super intrusive DRM. That's exactly why Ubisoft abandoned theirs, and patched it out of the games that already had it. And why EA has recently changed their stance, and called DRM a "failed, dead-end strategy". 

It just doesn't work. Period. Gamers know it. Pirates know it. Publishers know it. And they're slowly starting to admit it.

.......... Not sure where you were going with this.. Because your making it sound like this is a bad thing.. When it's a good thing..sSubZerOo

That's the kind of thinking that lets product-pushers inveigle you.

Maybe you believe that the likes of CD Projekt and its Good Old Games division are doing "good", but to me, until they implement transferable licenses, they are doing little more than pandering to anti-DRM blokes.

I, for one, remember the so-called "good ol' days" when computer games were not just shackled by DRM, they were also considered as goods that can be shared around, and not services that are unique to one and only one consumer when sold. CD Projekt doesn't adhere to the latter vision.

We just need a better system, that's why more and more publishers are creating clients like Steam.FelipeInside

I, for one, do not want loader clients. I do not want the online support for all of the game licenses that I purchased shackled to just one account and having to launch those games using said loader client instead of independent, self-contained executables.

EA has recently changed their stance, and called DRM a "failed, dead-end strategy". the_bi99man

That's just huff. Until they don't insist that their computer games have to be played through their Origin loader client, they have a rather narrow consideration of what is DRM.

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]We just need a better system, that's why more and more publishers are creating clients like Steam.Gelugon_baat

I, for one, do not want loader clients. I do not want the online support for all of the game licenses that I purchased shackled to just one account and having to launch those games using said loader client instead of independent, self-contained executables.

Me neither.FelipeInside

Well, you can always go further and stop buying from Steam. I know I had.

[QUOTE="the_bi99man"]EA has recently changed their stance, and called DRM a "failed, dead-end strategy". Gelugon_baat

That's just huff. Until they don't insist that their computer games have to be played through their Origin loader client, they have a rather narrow consideration of what is DRM.

Well they're obviously not going to do that. That'd be like expecting Valve to make their games not require Steam.

As long as Origin has a functioning offline mode, I'm fine with that, for the tiny handful of EA games that I give a shit about. Because, even though Origin isn't as good at it as Steam, it's still a similar thing. Like Steam, I consider Origin to be a store, storage for uninstalled games, and a social client first, and DRM second.

because harder to pirateJigglyWiggly_

[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]because harder to pirateAdvid-Gamer

Yeah, because DRM makes games  soooooo  hard to pirate. You know that the pirates were playing FC3 Blood Dragon a month before release, right? And they play every other game, usually day one, maybe a week late, at the most. Here's the comprehensive list of every game which actually had DRM prove successful, and prevent pirating.

Diablo 3

Simcity

Diablo 3 hasn't been pirated because the end-user literally doesn't even have all the necessary game files on their HDD. And as for SimCity.. the pirates don't even want to play it.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"] I actually agree with Gelugon. CD Projekt is a great company and I love the Witcher games, but sometimes they jump on the "We also hate DRM" bandwagon just to promote their products.FelipeInside

:| This is a good thing if it means they are not using DRM.. By all means EXPLOIT this.

Oddly enough,  as far as The Witcher 2 is concerned,  it was the version WITH DRM that was pirated more than the GoG version without it.  Definitely strange, no?

I also don't see why CDPR shouldn't complain if people pirate their game.  Just because they're not anti-consumer jackals (like EA, Activision/Blizzard, etc.) doesn't mean they are or should be okay with people stealing their games.  They simply realize that DRM hurts legitimate customers more than it stops pirates.  I really don't understand how the company that is treating their customers with respect is  somehow the "bad guy" in all of this.  It makes no sense at all.

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

:| This is a good thing if it means they are not using DRM.. By all means EXPLOIT this.

-wildflower-

Oddly enough,  as far as The Witcher 2 is concerned,  it was the version WITH DRM that was pirated more than the GoG version without it.  Definitely strange, no?

I also don't see why CDPR shouldn't complain if people pirate their game.  Just because they're not anti-consumer jackals (like EA, Activision/Blizzard, etc.) doesn't mean they are or should be okay with people stealing their games.  They simply realize that DRM hurts legitimate customers more than it stops pirates.  I really don't understand how the company that is treating their customers with respect is  somehow the "bad guy" in all of this.  It makes no sense at all.

No one said they were the bad guys.

And that version was pirated more cause it came out before.

[QUOTE="the_bi99man"]

[QUOTE="Advid-Gamer"] Exactly this, dont believe the garbage excuses the majority on this board say. I have also had almost zero trouble with any kind of DRM for the last 4 years, yet people here act as if it ruin's the game and is so bad it deserves to be pirated or something. Because it harder to pirate is the only answer u needAdvid-Gamer

Yeah, because DRM makes games  soooooo  hard to pirate. You know that the pirates were playing FC3 Blood Dragon a month before release, right? And they play every other game, usually day one, maybe a week late, at the most. Here's the comprehensive list of every game which actually had DRM prove successful, and prevent pirating.

Diablo 3

Simcity

Diablo 3 hasn't been pirated because the end-user literally doesn't even have all the necessary game files on their HDD. And as for SimCity.. the pirates don't even want to play it.

I'm not defending or justifying it. I'm just stating facts. DRM is, at best, a minor inconvenience, and at worst, a major inconvenience, but only for legitimate customers. It doesn't effect pirates in the least. Hell, I've got a friend who exclusively pirates his games, and I asked him what he thinks of Ubisoft changing their stance on DRM. He said, "what the hell is DRM?" And that makes perfect sense, that someone who only pirates games wouldn't even know about the issue. Obviously, the people who are doing the cracking in the first place have to deal with it, but they don't seem to have any trouble, seeing as pirate copies of 99% of games are available within hours of launch, if not before launch. And the people who aren't actually making cracks, but just downloading games from any number of torrent sites? They don't ever have to even know DRM exists. That is fvcking backwards. Even if it's only a minor inconvenience, it's still  something  of an inconvenience for real customers, and it means  literally nothing  to pirates.

Like Steam, I consider Origin to be a store, storage for uninstalled games, and a social client first, and DRM second.the_bi99man

Well, good for you then. I don't want to put up with loader clients more than I have to anymore.

[QUOTE="the_bi99man"]

[QUOTE="Advid-Gamer"] Exactly this, dont believe the garbage excuses the majority on this board say. I have also had almost zero trouble with any kind of DRM for the last 4 years, yet people here act as if it ruin's the game and is so bad it deserves to be pirated or something. Because it harder to pirate is the only answer u needAdvid-Gamer

Yeah, because DRM makes games  soooooo  hard to pirate. You know that the pirates were playing FC3 Blood Dragon a month before release, right? And they play every other game, usually day one, maybe a week late, at the most. Here's the comprehensive list of every game which actually had DRM prove successful, and prevent pirating.

Diablo 3

Simcity

Diablo 3 hasn't been pirated because the end-user literally doesn't even have all the necessary game files on their HDD. And as for SimCity.. the pirates don't even want to play it.

1. DRM affects legit customers.

2. Pirates aren't.

3. Legit customers complain about DRM.

There.

... and it means  literally nothing  to pirates.the_bi99man

Technical support also means nothing to pirates. ;)

Heck knows how unreliable cracked software can be.

[QUOTE="the_bi99man"]Like Steam, I consider Origin to be a store, storage for uninstalled games, and a social client first, and DRM second.Gelugon_baat

Well, good for you then. I don't want to put up with loader clients more than I have to anymore.

Yeah, I'd prefer it if other publishers would just get on board with Steam, and let it be the universal platform, but obviously a company as big as EA wasn't going to do that. Still, at least Origin tries to be something more than "just DRM". It's trying to do the steam thing, and that's respectable, at least. It's not like securom, which just installs extra shit on your system, which has been proven slow down your system, and also adds in a whole shit load of difficult-to-fix registry entries, while providing absolutely no service to the customer. Or Uplay, which doesn't do anything extra, is still required even though they sell their games on steam, and has been known to be a security issue, giving hackers and/or viruses an easy pipeline through which to enter your system.

[QUOTE="Gelugon_baat"]

[QUOTE="the_bi99man"]Like Steam, I consider Origin to be a store, storage for uninstalled games, and a social client first, and DRM second.the_bi99man

Well, good for you then. I don't want to put up with loader clients more than I have to anymore.

Yeah, I'd prefer it if other publishers would just get on board with Steam, and let it be the universal platform, but obviously a company as big as EA wasn't going to do that. Still, at least Origin tries to be something more than "just DRM". It's trying to do the steam thing, and that's respectable, at least. It's not like securom, which just installs extra shit on your system, which has been proven slow down your system, and also adds in a whole shit load of difficult-to-fix registry entries, while providing absolutely no service to the customer. Or Uplay, which doesn't do anything extra, is still required even though they sell their games on steam, and has been known to be a security issue, giving hackers and/or viruses an easy pipeline through which to enter your system.

[QUOTE="Advid-Gamer"]

[QUOTE="the_bi99man"]

Yeah, because DRM makes games  soooooo  hard to pirate. You know that the pirates were playing FC3 Blood Dragon a month before release, right? And they play every other game, usually day one, maybe a week late, at the most. Here's the comprehensive list of every game which actually had DRM prove successful, and prevent pirating.

Diablo 3

Simcity

Diablo 3 hasn't been pirated because the end-user literally doesn't even have all the necessary game files on their HDD. And as for SimCity.. the pirates don't even want to play it.

m25105

1. DRM affects legit customers.

2. Pirates aren't.

3. Legit customers complain about DRM.

There.

It really is this simple. People who still act as apologists for DRM, even as publishers are turning away from the practice, seem to have developed some bizzare kind of stockholm syndrome. It's like they were kidnapped, and now their captors are saying, "our plan backfired, we're not getting any ransom money, so you're free to go, and we're just gonna slink away before the police show up", and they're sitting there, kicking and screaming, saying, "NO! don't let me go! I don't want to go back to my life and my family!"

If anything I think it gives people a way to "justify" to themselves why they pirate there  games, alot of you on these boards seem to always somehow try and justify piracy and act as if a sale was never lost anyways and it dosent matter, Been in many arguments about it over the years, to me most of you seem like dirty pirates. The pc community here for the most part are arrogant snotty little brats.Advid-Gamer

@m25105, I would tell you that I actually acknowledge and understand Advid-Gamer's opinion. There are a lot of narcissists here who deny that piracy doesn't hurt game-makers and try to sugarcoat what they do.

I would prefer that if they are more brutally but more refreshingly honest like some unabashed pirates that I (had the misfortune to) know.

I don't care about who's making games. I just want to be entertained for as cheaply as possible - preferably for free. If some game company sinks, I look to others.Unabashed pirate whose username I could not remember but user has been banned for putting links to pirate torrents on GameSpot

(He/she is too stupid to keep those links to himself/herself.)

Yeah, I'd prefer it if other publishers would just get on board with Steam... (and so on)the_bi99man

Why are you telling me all that? I have told you that I do not care for loader clients, have I not?

Although I like Steam, I wouldn't want them to have a monopoly on DRM either.FelipeInside

Especially when Steam has a Term of Service that asks the user to give up litigation rights - together with Valve's of course, but that would mean Valve has the final say in disputes anyway, wouldn't it?

No one said they were the bad guys.

And that version was pirated more cause it came out before.

FelipeInside

Yeah, "bad guys" was a bit of a stretch maybe but it certainly seems like they are being ridiculed for their anti-DRM stance which makes zero sense.  As far as release dates go, at least in the US, both the GoG version and the boxed, DRM infested, Atari version were released simultaneously.  

[QUOTE="the_bi99man"]

[QUOTE="Gelugon_baat"]

Well, good for you then. I don't want to put up with loader clients more than I have to anymore.

FelipeInside

Yeah, I'd prefer it if other publishers would just get on board with Steam, and let it be the universal platform, but obviously a company as big as EA wasn't going to do that. Still, at least Origin tries to be something more than "just DRM". It's trying to do the steam thing, and that's respectable, at least. It's not like securom, which just installs extra shit on your system, which has been proven slow down your system, and also adds in a whole shit load of difficult-to-fix registry entries, while providing absolutely no service to the customer. Or Uplay, which doesn't do anything extra, is still required even though they sell their games on steam, and has been known to be a security issue, giving hackers and/or viruses an easy pipeline through which to enter your system.

That's the thing. Again, I don't think "DRM" when I think "Steam". Steam is a storefront, and a service, which provides a plethora of fantastic conveniences, which more than makes up for anything negative about it. It's a platform for keeping your games, installed and uninstalled, organized and easily accessible. It's the PC's version of Playstation's PSN, and Xbox's XBL. I wish publishers would just abandon DRM entirely, and then make their games available, exclusively or not, through Steam, just for the sake of giving people the option to have everything nice and organized, in one place. So, it's not like Steam would have a monopoly on DRM, because there wouldn't be DRM. Steam might then have a monopoly on the  interface  I guess. But as long as other retailers are selling steam keys, and undercutting steam's prices, which they do all the time, it's not like the monopoly would really mean anything.

As far as release dates go, at least in the US, both the GoG version and the boxed, DRM infested, Atari version were released simultaneously.  -wildflower-

The two of you can argue all the way to heck and back, but I, for one, am not going to overlook the fact that the GOG version was uploaded to torrent sites too, regardless of the proportion of unpaid downloads for either version.

[QUOTE="the_bi99man"]Yeah, I'd prefer it if other publishers would just get on board with Steam... (and so on)Gelugon_baat

Why are you telling me all that? I have told you that I do not care for loader clients, have I not?

I'm just saying that Steam is much more than a simple loader client, and the other things it does more than make up for any inconvenience it might cause. And it can be completely invisible as a loader client anyway. I still have regular shortcuts to all my games, outside of the steam menus. I just keep steam running in the background, which uses a completely insignificant, and unnoticeable amount of system resources, then I launch games from regular shortcuts. I don't even need to see steam.

@m25105, I would tell you that I actually acknowledge and understand Advid-Gamer's opinion. There are a lot of narcissists here who deny that piracy doesn't hurt game-makers and try to sugarcoat what they do.

I would prefer that if they are more brutally but more refreshingly honest like some unabashed pirates that I (had the misfortune to) know.

First, I'd like you to point exactly where anyone in this thread has denied Piracy is a bad thing. Cause I sure as hell didn't see it. I don't pirate and I doubt most of the people in the thread does, we have a problem though that despite being legit consumers we get treated as we're thieves. That shit doesn't affect the pirates and it never will. So where's the logic in DRM?

Also here's a brilliant statement from the developer of Super Meat Boy, basically they sold around 2 million copies and estimate that 200,000 copies were pirated. That's pretty good.

I'm just saying that Steam is much more than a simple loader client, and the other things it does more than make up for any inconvenience it might cause. the_bi99man

Perhaps to you - but not to me. I still find the Steam loader client to be a hassle compared to self-contained executables and builds for games.

First, I'd like you to point exactly where anyone in this thread has denied Piracy is a bad thing.m25105

Ask the other user that. I have seen more than enough responses by piracy apologists elsewhere to care about who else made such a post here.

I don't pirate and I doubt most of the people in the thread does, we have a problem though that despite being legit consumers we get treated as we're thieves.m25105

Hey, I am not about to believe that people that I don't know personally had or had not pirated.

Also, game-makers are not treating legitimate customers as "thieves" with the imposition of DRM - they instead are very likely using the DRM to collect more information on customers, their playing habits and their purchase preferences than they would think. Piracy makes a damn good excuse to "justify" this.

That shit doesn't affect the pirates and it never will. So where's the logic in DRM?m25105

What are you really arguing about?

Also, those who use cracked software get terribly unreliable software with no technical support, and thicker and stupider DRM only leads to them getting more cracked and unreliable software.

Nowadays, the phrase "cracked" also applies to the stability of the software as much as the state of the DRM code that shackles it.

Also here's a brilliant statement from the developer of Super Meat Boy, basically they sold around 2 million copies and estimate that 200,000 copies were pirated. That's pretty good.m25105

Firstly, that's just an estimate that arose from an assumption on Team Meat's part and not exactly verifiable statistical studies, and secondly, the fact that the game was pirated anyway remained. Also, what's the point of this citation?

[QUOTE="the_bi99man"]I'm just saying that Steam is much more than a simple loader client, and the other things it does more than make up for any inconvenience it might cause. Gelugon_baat

Perhaps to you - but not to me. I still find the Steam loader client to be a hassle compared to self-contained executables and builds for games.

Alright. If that's how you feel. I just don't understand how it's any different. I install a game through steam. I hit "make desktop shortcut". I minimize steam to the taskbar. I launch game with desktop shortcut. Exactly like I always did in the years before steam.

Alright. If that's how you feel. I just don't understand how it's any different. I install a game through steam. I hit "make desktop shortcut". I minimize steam to the taskbar. I launch game with desktop shortcut. Exactly like I always did in the years before steam.the_bi99man

Well, if you can put up with that, good for you.

To me, I will always keep in mind that there's some loader client which is sucking up resources in the background, which I have to tweak often to prevent it from running other processes automatically without my consent and which I have to update manually because I don't want automated notifications getting in my face whenever I am doing something else other than manually updating Steam and the games shackled to it.

[QUOTE="m25105"]

[QUOTE="Advid-Gamer"] If anything I think it gives people a way to "justify" to themselves why they pirate there  games, alot of you on these boards seem to always somehow try and justify piracy and act as if a sale was never lost anyways and it dosent matter, Been in many arguments about it over the years, to me most of you seem like dirty pirates. The pc community here for the most part are arrogant snotty little brats.

the_bi99man

1. DRM affects legit customers.

2. Pirates aren't.

3. Legit customers complain about DRM.

There.

It really is this simple. People who still act as apologists for DRM, even as publishers are turning away from the practice, seem to have developed some bizzare kind of stockholm syndrome. It's like they were kidnapped, and now their captors are saying, "our plan backfired, we're not getting any ransom money, so you're free to go, and we're just gonna slink away before the police show up", and they're sitting there, kicking and screaming, saying, "NO! don't let me go! I don't want to go back to my life and my family!"

[QUOTE="m25105"]First, I'd like you to point exactly where anyone in this thread has denied Piracy is a bad thing.Gelugon_baat

Ask the other user that. I have seen more than enough responses by piracy apologists elsewhere to care about who else made such a post here.

I don't pirate and I doubt most of the people in the thread does, we have a problem though that despite being legit consumers we get treated as we're thieves.m25105

Hey, I am not about to believe that people that I don't know personally had or had not pirated.

Also, game-makers are not treating legitimate customers as "thieves" with the imposition of DRM - they instead are very likely using the DRM to collect more information on customers, their playing habits and their purchase preferences than they would think. Piracy makes a damn good excuse to "justify" this.

That shit doesn't affect the pirates and it never will. So where's the logic in DRM?m25105

What are you really arguing about?

Also here's a brilliant statement from the developer of Super Meat Boy, basically they sold around 2 million copies and estimate that 200,000 copies were pirated. That's pretty good.m25105

Firstly, that's just an estimate that arose from an assumption on Team Meat's part and not exactly verifiable statistical studies, and secondly, the fact that the game was pirated anyway remained. Also, what's the point of this citation?