Should game companies stop producing drm protection to stop pirates?

[Misanthrope]

12 minutes ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

I imagine not using DRM cost them lots of sales. Even though the game is universally loved it didn't sell anywhere near as many copies as crap like Call of Duty Black Ops 3 (which you of course had to pay for since it's an online game).

You can imagine all you want: there's not a single study that shows a direct, irrefutable correlation between DRM, piracy and total sales. Every time we look at the numbers we never see any effect. 

 

All of the studies that publishers push around are deeply and irreversible flawed since they do something profoundly stupid that invalidates their results: They equate each download to a lost sale. That's ludicrous to assume anybody able to download a free copy had the economical means to purchase the game at full retail price otherwise. 0. Nada. Not a goddamn thing to support such claim that publishers happily and constantly make.

[SteveGrabowski0]

1 minute ago, Misanthrope said:

You can imagine all you want: there's not a single study that shows a direct, irrefutable correlation between DRM, piracy and total sales. Every time we look at the numbers we never see any effect. 

 

All of the studies that publishers push around are deeply and irreversible flawed since they do something profoundly stupid that invalidates their results: They equate each download to a lost sale. That's ludicrous to assume anybody able to download a free copy had the economical means to purchase the game at full retail price otherwise. 0. Nada. Not a goddamn thing to support such claim that publishers happily and constantly make.

You would think Witcher 3 would have been a better selling game though considering how much it's loved. I think it's probably the best game to be released since Skyrim, and even better than GTA V. Though I do have a biased view as a pc gamer, maybe it wasn't great on console?

[Misanthrope]

7 minutes ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

You would think Witcher 3 would have been a better selling game though considering how much it's loved. I think it's probably the best game to be released since Skyrim, and even better than GTA V. Though I do have a biased view as a pc gamer, maybe it wasn't great on console?

There's definitively some of that: the game toned down a lot of the mechanics from previous games but it's still quite complex. Take a look at the overly simplistic skill tree from Skyrim:

 

 

Vs Witcher 3:

 

 

It's just way beyond what console players are used to. For me Witcher 3 it's still simple: I grew up memorizing skill and ability tables from Advanced Dungeons and Dragons to be able to comprehend Baldur's Gate II and it's full fucking book that's included as the game manual (Not even kidding: 260+ pages) so of course this is fun yet manageable.

 

Compare it vs Joe Console dude that's never seen anything more complex than CoD when it comes to RPG elements and well, you've got yourself a niche audience.

[intelCore]

11 hours ago, Centurius said:

It actually wouldn't, if everyone has a lot of money no one does. 

And that is the reason why this system is not supposed to be in place. If you need such a big gap between rich and poor for this to work then this is clearly the wrong way.

[typographie]

On 9/7/2016 at 10:01 PM, Small2134 said:

It work?

Well, Denuvo copy protection seems to work. Of course the games still get cracked eventually, but in most cases it seems to take so long that it's not possible to pirate until long after the initial launch week rush on the game. Most triple-A games sell a huge percentage of their total lifetime sales during that first week or two. As long as Denuvo is fending off piracy for that launch window, I think publishers will consider it successful.

 

I don't like DRM, but I can tolerate it as long as it does not interrupt or inconvenience paying customers. For example, I can install Anno 2070 from Steam, but to play it I have to be logged into Steam and Uplay, type a product key, burn one of three activation limits, and then log into a third online service specific to the game. That's how Ubisoft requires paying customers experience that game.

[Praesi]

9 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

There's definitively some of that: the game toned down a lot of the mechanics from previous games but it's still quite complex. Take a look at the overly simplistic skill tree from Skyrim:

 

 

Vs Witcher 3:

 

 

It's just way beyond what console players are used to. For me Witcher 3 it's still simple: I grew up memorizing skill and ability tables from Advanced Dungeons and Dragons to be able to comprehend Baldur's Gate II and it's full fucking book that's included as the game manual (Not even kidding: 260+ pages) so of course this is fun yet manageable.

 

Compare it vs Joe Console dude that's never seen anything more complex than CoD when it comes to RPG elements and well, you've got yourself a niche audience.

I miss those Days. Todays RPG,s are just laughable in this category.

[Centurius]

11 hours ago, intelCore said:

And that is the reason why this system is not supposed to be in place. If you need such a big gap between rich and poor for this to work then this is clearly the wrong way.

Yes human nature is indeed a bad thing. If you put everyone on an equal footing most motivation to achieve and produce something goes away. Why should a construction worker construct stuff if he can get everything he needs anyway without lifting a finger? Remove currency and you remove ambition.

 

[intelCore]

Just now, Centurius said:

Yes human nature is indeed a bad thing. If you put everyone on an equal footing most motivation to achieve and produce something goes away. Why should a construction worker construct stuff if he can get everything he needs anyway without lifting a finger? Remove currency and you remove ambition.

 

I actually don't think that is the case. What I think is we should just take the essentials out of the same cycle all the luxury articles are traded in so that the ones that want to live minimalistic can do that without having to do what everyone else wants needs to do to get luxury. I don't think that having the basics for free would make everyone stop working because they could get their food and their flats for free. They would still want luxury and work for that.

 

And if you want to maybe know about different currency models: http://www.lietaer.com/2010/03/the-worgl-experiment/ An experiment that was tried in 1933 in a town in Austria that was then shut down by our central bank. Should make one think why considering it worked that good.