Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Op Ed

View
56 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 ] Older >

56. Re: Op Ed Jan 2, 2009, 01:53 MindFever
 
@Creamyblood

Yes...but to hear a rant about "thieving bastards" from the MASTER himself (Derek Smart, PHD not) it's beyond belieff.
 
"Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish" -- Euripides
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
55. Re: Op Ed Dec 29, 2008, 13:10 MindFever
 
And thieving bastards like you would still pirate it.
dsmart:you are the thieving bastard who gives alot of promisses and delivers a fart... i still remember you from the old days when i was a kid - even bought your game.TWICE! What a moron i was...

Go and search your games on a popular torrent site ... see if you can find any game from your production.It isnt worth downloading.
LOL and now you have the nerve to call other people thieves??
Fuck off with such comments.
 
"Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish" -- Euripides
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
54. Re: Op Ed Dec 18, 2008, 20:35 tgr
 
Well, you do get http://reviews.cnet.com/keyboards/microsoft-xbox-360-messenger/4505-3134_7-32517446.html if you like, but that's specifically disallowed in games by microsoft. I seem to remember that this was because they didn't want the xbox to encroach too much on the PC marked, however some people claim it's because it would "unbalance gaming". Except they don't appear to be complaining about steering wheels in racing games, or guitars in guitar hero, etc etc etc.

Actually, ask for KB/MS on the 360, and you'll start to think the pirate/anti-pirate discussion is performed by very adult people compared to the console weirdoes. 99% of the time the first comment will invariably be something related to "you're a cheater" or "it's not balanced/fair!" etc. http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?s=ed04ddac1fbef30bd831327fb299aae0&p=1228007&postcount=15 has a few good points on this subject of fairness etc.

Hell, if they're afraid it would compete against the PCs with regards to flexibility, they could just provide a special keypad (20 keys should be plenty) and a mouse and that's it. I just want to play games like far cry 2 on the console without having to slow-pan. I made that mistake with GRAW once, I'm not making it again. Pity, since apparently that's where there's les piracy, more sales and higher prices. I guess they don't really want my money anyway.

This comment was edited on Dec 18, 2008, 20:36.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
53. Re: Op Ed Dec 18, 2008, 12:21 Tumbler
 
Actually, allowing keyboard/mouse for gaming use would, as far as I can see, basically erradicate the entire difference (apart from just raw performance) between the 360 and the PC.

The PS3 was all setup to do this and it looks like it's an empty promise. I think controller sales are a big part of the business model for consoles and if you change the controllers to being optional and players can just bring their own Keyboard and Mouse combo's then I think console companies lose money they would otherwise have made.

I'd love to see keyboards and Mouse become fully supported in console games but until you see games letting players configure each key on a controller I don't think you have a prayer of seeing keyboards and mice supported on consoles...

I really don't understand why they don't let us map the keys on the controllers at this point... It's annoying as hell to go from one game like CoD4 to another like BFBC that uses different buttons for the same functions.

It would be really nice to setup the controls I liked best on every game.

I imagine it's just easier to keep things under one config. Why build in the ability to do extra stuff when you don't have to?
 
99gamers.com-Game trading site, PC digital trading!
Kickstarter "Game Developer"!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
52. Re: Op Ed Dec 18, 2008, 08:44 tgr
 
@dsmart
By the same token, those who are worrying about an authentication server going offline are pissing in the wind because unless you forgot to read the EULA, you don't own frigging game. You have a license to use it.
Yes and no. I've said it before, I'll say it again: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine

Specifically the following:
In 1909 the codification originally applied to copies that had been sold (hence the "first sale doctrine"), but in the 1976 Act it was made to apply to any "owner" of a lawfully made copy or phonorecord (recorded music) regardless of whether it was first sold. So, for example, if the copyright owner licenses someone to make a copy (such as by downloading), then that copy (meaning the tangible medium of expression onto which it was copied under license, be it a hard drive or removable storage medium) may lawfully be sold, lent, traded, or given away.
and
Some U.S. case law allows manufacturers to restrict the first-sale doctrine by a clickwrap contract or other agreement. The case law is conflicting, however, and the legality of allowing first-sale doctrine rights to be abrogated by contract has been questioned.
I'll even add http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2007/11/you-bought-it-you-own-it-part-iv-quanta-v-lg-electronics which I just found.

In short, they haven't really decided whether or not such agreements should override first-sale doctrine. In fact, there are a few examples of such EULAs being regarded as not valid, and the whole "the software's licensed, not sold" part is just yet another attempt in a long long line by copyright/patent holders to try to restrict consumer rights.

Heck my DTV, phone, DSL etc all go dark every now and then, but my life goes on. In fact a few weeks back I was on dial-up, believe it or not, because my DSL was down for over a day. Did AT&T tell me why? Nope. Did I switch to cable? Nope.
You may very well not change your providers when they go dark for a whole day, that still doesn't change the fact they've then basically cheated you out of 1 day's share of the monthly (or whatever it is you pay for) subscription fee. In an ideal world, you would be refunded for that day's downtime. Unfortunately, nobody does demand that, so the few who do are just ignored. That's their loss, it still doesn't mean it's right.

The gamers who are against online authentication (at least if it isn't removed after, say, 6-12 months by a patch, which I'll grudgingly accept as an anti-piracy cooldown period) just haven't given up their rights yet. That's the difference between "the vocal minority" who are clamoring against online activations, and in particular one with limits.

And just in case the whole "well, look at MMOs then!" thing pops up again, consider this: there's a radically different mental outset that we, the gamers, enter into when we enter into an MMO vs a singleplayer game such as Spore or FarCry 2. When we buy into an MMO, we buy a service. It, like the phone company, can have outages, and trust me they do. They are also games which depend on the fact there are other gamers around, because otherwise there wouldn't be any point to joining an MMO game. Hence "massive" and "multiplayer". There's also a very logical link between "the servers are down" and "it's not working", because you are aware of the fact that you're dependent on an external source before you even bought the game, and it's an intrinsic value of the structure of the game itself. So you accept the risks of it being down to get the experience.

Singleplayer games like Spore however is more aimed at people sitting at a computer and playing at their own pace, at their own choosing. If it refuses to install or start because the authorization server is down, then that is wholly illogical for the common user. There's no direct link between their game and some "authorization server, whatever that is". If you were denied from downloading creatures because your game was "illegal", then that would be a much smaller problem to understand, because then you already know that you are going out on the internet to fetch some resources. You can then more readily accept it, since it doesn't really impact more than that part of the game. Even if they were to shut down the servers permanently, that'll only be a part of the game which was unavailable. You can still make all the creatures the other people've made, it'll just take time.

You've said yourself that limiting resale etc is wrong, but that is basically what the online activation thing IS, unless it is removed after the initial sales date of the game (since that's when the most income is realized), and even then I'd consider it borderline. Not due to the practical aspects, it's the principle of the thing. Most games are played through once and then put away, never to be played again, but that's my choice. It isn't something which should be forced upon me. But the reason for me considering it borderline is because even though patches are released, they may not always be available when I suddenly get the urge to play an old game again, or if I sell it/give it to a nephew who is weird and likes the nostalgia of older games.

But I'll accept that as a risk of doing gaming, if only it would get RTS/FPS games developers to go back to the PC as a primary platform again. Failling that, get a keyboard/mouse controller for the consoles so real men can play real games with real depth, and not just these watered-down games of today.

If Microsoft wanted to kill PC gaming, they could do it overnight. All it would take is <long list>
Actually, for me, all it would take to reconnect the 360 to the 20" monitor is ... allowing a keyboard and mouse to be used in the games. This one restriction is enough to put me off of the 360 with a few notable exceptions: GTA4 and Mass Effect. Racing games have steering wheels (even if their physics suck), guitar player/rockband have other specialized equipment, but keyboard/mouse so FPS/RTS games can be played sensibly? Noooooo. Das ist verboten! Which means I'm clinging desperately on to the PC as a gaming platform. The games which I want to play are just not made or properly doable on a console. If Supreme Commander 2 is released on the consoles, chances are I'd rather eat my own kitchen table than be forced to play that with a gaming pad, with its slow tracking etc. Just like playing GRAW on the 360 was like walking on melted glass while being shot at with mortars; i.e. Painful. I played that for 15 minutes, threw the DVD in the cover and tossed it so far back into the gaming cupboard I could.

Actually, allowing keyboard/mouse for gaming use would, as far as I can see, basically erradicate the entire difference (apart from just raw performance) between the 360 and the PC.

How much do you want to wager that once they've cut out the PC as a platform to develop on because the consoles have a much lower piracy rate than the PC, they're going to bitch and moan about piracy rates on the consoles as well? And second-hand sales (oh boo hoo hoo 20% of games sold today are used games, we're starving!).
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
51. Re: Op Ed Dec 17, 2008, 12:31 CreamyBlood
 
I think I know the level you are talking about, it was hard and frustrating. I don't know if it took forty reloads to beat it but it was a lot. Some levels were really easy, the occasional one extremely difficult. It probably could have used to re-balancing.  
Avatar 19418
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
50. Re: Op Ed Dec 16, 2008, 12:03 Tumbler
 
Same with Nexus: The Jupiter Incident. I was like, whoohooo!

I really enjoyed this game...to a point. It was crazy difficult after a certain point. i don't know if the game was broken or if I just wasn't seeing what I needed to do but I got stopped cold on one mission and I must have tried it 40 times before giving up on the game. (Citadel? Involved some huge space station that I needed to knock out it's shields, but it had a fleet of baddies around it that just tore my little rag tag gang of ships a new A-hole)

The game was great, I would have loved for them to expand on it. The controls were a bit unresponsive, it wasn't too clear if you were using things correctly or not, but I really enjoyed it. Building my ships and choosing weapons, engines, etc, was a lot of fun.


 
99gamers.com-Game trading site, PC digital trading!
Kickstarter "Game Developer"!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
49. Re: Op Ed Dec 16, 2008, 05:24 CreamyBlood
 
The games these days aren't even worth pirating.

I can spend five hours going through groups, downloading .nfo files and hunting down reviews on different sites.

And at the end of five hours, I have a treasure trove of free games I can download, but I don't. Not because of morality. But because I just killed five hours methodically reading reviews of shit I don't want.

I did download Fallout 1, but that was because I was too lazy to walk over to the boxes and unpack it. Talk about convenience.

Same with Nexus: The Jupiter Incident. I was like, whoohooo!

So whatever, Deadspace, nah. CoD5, nah. What is that, like 7GB? Fuck, it's easier to buy it in the store when I care.

The Witcher was tantalizing, but again, how many GB? I'll download it off steam. Or buy the DVD, whatever hits me first.

I like finding the old gems. Once in awhile they're there.

And yes, I downloaded FO1 about two weeks before GOG opened. So sue me.
 
Avatar 19418
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
48. Re: Op Ed Dec 15, 2008, 22:28 Jerykk
 
And thieving bastards like you would still pirate it.

Thieving bastards like me might even buy it if it ended up being a good game.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
47. Re: Op Ed Dec 15, 2008, 20:55  dsmart 
 
Or you can just sell them both for $20.

And thieving bastards like you would still pirate it.
 
Avatar 9141
 
Game developers are just human beings who happen to make games for a living. If you want to hold us up to higher standards of conduct, then go ahead
...but don't be surprised if we don't uphold them
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
46. Re: Op Ed Dec 15, 2008, 19:17 CreamyBlood
 
I understand what you're trying to say in theory, but I don't really agree with much of it in practice.

1. PC games need to auto patch in exactly the same manner as on the 360. It needs to be seamless and handled automatically by the game.

I don't think so. From OS patches to apps and even games, what fixes one mans trash often breaks anothers. I could live with it if it asked me first, but gave me the option to bail.

I already have a PC, and know how to use google: "bioshock patch download". It's not difficult.

2. Drivers - Shipping games that need a driver upgrade to play and not including that on the game disc so the game can handle it automatically is a problem.

That makes sense, as long as I'm given the option. This has been done will millions of variants of DirectX for several years. As long as it's optional, who cares? But installing one driver might break two other games that I have. Games that I care about.

3. Multiplayer Games - ... I think PC games can no longer choose to focus on singleplayer games like they have in the past and must focus on building a MAJOR portion of the content around a multiplayer experience that players can only experience through a service they provide. I believe this is the driving force in most of my buying decisions for PC games. Does it have a strong multiplayer game in it?

I think that is bullshit. I know the three multiplayer games I like, I mainly play single player games. I'm not interested in seeing FEAR's or Crysis's, or Call of Duty's broken, boring, run of the mill multiplayer component.

I buy certain games for multiplayer and the rest for single player. Why should I have to connect to the internet to play Bioshock? Or STALKER? I didn't buy the games for their lame tacked on multiplayer component and I think developers should actually stop doing what your suggesting.

Is Baldurs Gate a multiplayer game? Why does every single devloper think that tacking on some broken, yet functional, deathmatch component is worth the effort? They are better off focusing their energies on the single player game instead of ticking off features in a list.

Leave the multiplayer for games that are designed for it, like Q3A or BF42.

I don't believe that every peiece of software I install on my computer has a right to 'call home' whenever it wants to. It's irritating.

How many computer systems have you seen where the app tray is longer than the task bar? Twenty million apps, all running their own process, staking out a peice of the pie just to call home when they want to. I'm so sick of it.

How about I just buy a single player game, install it and it doesn't fuck me over with DRM, 'call home' crap and background processes.

Everyone wants a piece of my CPU pie, including memory and bandwidth. Should we have a Valve Steam, an EA Steam, and Activision and Atari Steam, all taking up their chunk.

Hey! Let's throw in .Net version whatever and how about Windows Live and Rockstar Live and maybe we can get a chat program going for Bioshock and a couple for Call of Duty and shit, why not just install a couple of toolbars for my browser while you're at it as I might need instant access to some game homepages.

Just tired of the bullshit.

I think if you want it easy, get a console.


 
Avatar 19418
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
45. Re: Op Ed Dec 15, 2008, 18:44 Jerykk
 
e.g. if you want to buy the whole thing, you pay $39.99. If you have no interest in multiplayer, then you buy the $29.99 version which has no multiplayer. What do you guys think of this idea?

Or you can just sell them both for $20.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
44. Re: Op Ed Dec 15, 2008, 18:32 Prez
 
... the console is woefully inferior to the PC. The saving grace for the console is that when targeting a specific platform, you can do more with less. The reality is that the PC will always be years and generations ahead of the console in many ways.

Agree completely. But I also recognize why it's basically a no-brainer for a developer to develop for consoles.


A lot of money is going to console games because PC game companies just don't seem to be adapting to the market. Piracy is high, but that isn't why I'm not spending money on PC games. Consoles offer a better experience overall for me. There are some exceptions but I'd say 90% of the games that come to the market I go with console versions because I don't want to deal with the typical PC bullshit that comes with games today, and I can play the games for cheap on the consoles.

Exactly. I love the PC, but the decentralized, unregulated nature of it, while in many ways a huge boon, is also a bane for the reasons you stated.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
43. Re: Op Ed Dec 15, 2008, 17:17  dsmart 
 
With a few small changes it can be much more so. It doesn't feel like PC game companies are interested in putting in the effort though.

I agree to some extent; but remember, we don't set out to shoot ourselves in the foot.

There is so much frustration with piracy they don't realize that dollars that could be spent on their products are going elsewhere.

Indeed, indeed.

Multiplayer is nice. It can be fun. But it's no replacement for single-player games. I don't want to be rushed or have to deal with other people all the time. Sometimes I just want to play a game at my own pace without anyone yelling at me and calling me a fag because I'm not doing what they want me to do. No, single-player games are never going to go away. There's just too many types of games that don't lend themselves well to multiplayer, and sometimes you just don't want to deal with all the asshats on the net.

I quite agree with this. In fact, my guess is that at some point games are going to start being sold in two different models, similar to how you can buy casual games with different modes.

e.g. if you want to buy the whole thing, you pay $39.99. If you have no interest in multiplayer, then you buy the $29.99 version which has no multiplayer. What do you guys think of this idea?

Problem is that if you later decide that you do want multiplayer, then you have to fork out for a new game. Kinda like buying a game, then its expansions. And like the sucker some of us are, having owned all the expansions, go out and buy the Ultimate Gold compilation which contains everything - you already own. I dunno how many times EA got me in that trap with most of their earlier titles e.g. the Janes games.

 
Avatar 9141
 
Game developers are just human beings who happen to make games for a living. If you want to hold us up to higher standards of conduct, then go ahead
...but don't be surprised if we don't uphold them
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
42. Re: Op Ed Dec 15, 2008, 15:30 Tumbler
 
PC gaming will never be as convenient as console gaming.

With a few small changes it can be much more so. It doesn't feel like PC game companies are interested in putting in the effort though.

There is so much frustration with piracy they don't realize that dollars that could be spent on their products are going elsewhere.

Currently I have 4 different 360 games to play that are rented, and I just bought 3 others on sale. I have more games than I know what to do with currently. I have Left 4 dead, and Gal Civ 2 addons to play, World in Conflict, and Sins expansion right around the corner (I HOPE). In the past the only games I wanted to spend time on were PC games, but console games have really stepped up and gotten in the way.

Even if they can win the battle against piracy, they are going to lose the war if they don't start catering to their paying customers.

This comment was edited on Dec 15, 2008, 15:31.
 
99gamers.com-Game trading site, PC digital trading!
Kickstarter "Game Developer"!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
41. Re: Op Ed Dec 15, 2008, 15:20 Jerykk
 
As Tumbler pointed out, the greatest advantage consoles have over PCs is convenience. In the end, that's what matters most to the average consumer. If it was simply a matter of quality, PC would be the most popular platform. PC gaming will never be as convenient as console gaming.  
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
40. Re: Op Ed Dec 15, 2008, 14:06 Wowbagger_TIP
 
1. PC games need to auto patch in exactly the same manner as on the 360. It needs to be seamless and handled automatically by the game.
It would be nice if more games did this. Many have an option to search for updates too. Services like Steam or Impulse handle this well.

2. Drivers - Shipping games that need a driver upgrade to play and not including that on the game disc so the game can handle it automatically is a problem. Looking for the newest nvidia drivers or ATI drivers is annoying.

Since when do you have to hunt for drivers? If you don't know exactly where to get them by now, you've got issues. It's quite simple. Go to the downloads page. Select your OS and card, and download your new driver. Simple.

3. Multiplayer Games - PC games major advantage currently is multiplayer gaming.
Multiplayer is nice. It can be fun. But it's no replacement for single-player games. I don't want to be rushed or have to deal with other people all the time. Sometimes I just want to play a game at my own pace without anyone yelling at me and calling me a fag because I'm not doing what they want me to do. No, single-player games are never going to go away. There's just too many types of games that don't lend themselves well to multiplayer, and sometimes you just don't want to deal with all the asshats on the net.

I enjoy some games on the console. Some games work well there. I don't play on my XBox 360 very much, but it can be fun sometimes. I recently downloaded a bunch of demos and XBLA trials, and found a few more games that I like. They tend to be platformers or shooters or driving games, which I don't mind playing with the controller. FPS, RTS and some other game types I find to be frustrating to play with the controller, so I just don't play those on the console. It's a ridiculously inferior control device next to the mouse/keyboard, and I don't want to spend time struggling with it's imprecise mechanics. Mirror's Edge seems like a pretty cool game, but it seems more like me vs. the controller than me vs. the game. It will never be possible to be as precise with thumb knobbies as with a mouse. Until they come up with a better controller for FPS games, I'll never be buying them for the console.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
39. Re: Op Ed Dec 15, 2008, 13:27 Tumbler
 
Indeed, but the console is woefully inferior to the PC. The saving grace for the console is that when targeting a specific platform, you can do more with less. The reality is that the PC will always be years and generations ahead of the console in many ways.

This opinion is a big problem for PC developers. (In my opinion) Your end product is not superior to console version. In most cases you end product is the same as console versions.

I'm faced with a choice with most new games of buying a PC copy or a console copy. And it's almost never a PC copy I end up getting. Buying and playing a console copy of a game is vastly more fun than working with the same pc game. I cringe at the idea of buying CoD4 on the PC instead of the 360.

The one exception, and I was surprised, is Left 4 Dead. After playing the demo on the PC and 360 I preferred the PC version. So much so that I couldn't even bother renting the full version of the 360 version.

But that is way outside the norm.

PC game companies need to start focusing on what the consoles are doing right and why my dollars go to them instead of PC games. A few suggestions:

1. PC games need to auto patch in exactly the same manner as on the 360. It needs to be seamless and handled automatically by the game. If you can setup an authentication server you can add an auto patcher to that. No more hunting for patches, applying them in order, etc. No Forum searchs, just start the game, says it needs an update, does it automatically and poof, ready to go. Many games do this, but if you're doesn't you need to get this working with your game.

2. Drivers - Shipping games that need a driver upgrade to play and not including that on the game disc so the game can handle it automatically is a problem. Looking for the newest nvidia drivers or ATI drivers is annoying. This doesn't come as a surprise, you obviously designed the game while testing it on these drivers so get the game to automatically ask users to upgrade these drivers. Audio as well if possible.

3. Multiplayer Games - PC games major advantage currently is multiplayer gaming. (My opinion) It's free, it can handle much larger games, the games can be more complex, and I don't see many games exploit this advantage. This is also a MASSIVE incentive to being a legit paying customer. Sins did this and I bought it. L4D did and I bought it. I think PC games can no longer choose to focus on singleplayer games like they have in the past and must focus on building a MAJOR portion of the content around a multiplayer experience that players can only experience through a service they provide. I believe this is the driving force in most of my buying decisions for PC games. Does it have a strong multiplayer game in it? Yes? Probably going to buy it in order to play that.

I'm thinking that changes like these are a huge leap for PC game companies because it's going to all but abandon the cookie cutter method of developer a good single player adventure with a lesser multiplayer component...but such is life. Pirates are clearly way a head of you circumventing copy protections and if my dollars are important to you the focus needs to be on features that I'm willing to pay for...so far you haven't come up with much that interests me.

A lot of money is going to console games because PC game companies just don't seem to be adapting to the market. Piracy is high, but that isn't why I'm not spending money on PC games. Consoles offer a better experience overall for me. There are some expections but I'd say 90% of the games that come to the market I go with console versions because I don't want to deal with the typical PC bullshit that comes with games today, and I can play the games for cheap on the consoles.

This comment was edited on Dec 15, 2008, 13:48.
 
99gamers.com-Game trading site, PC digital trading!
Kickstarter "Game Developer"!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
38. Re: Op Ed Dec 15, 2008, 12:06 Jerykk
 
Again, you missed the point I was trying to make Jeryk. Just because you buy one or two games, but steal others you'd rather not buy, doesn't make you any less a thieving pirate than the person who steals ALL their games.

Uh, what? So buying games doesn't make me less of a thief than people who never buy games and only copy them? Interesting logic you got there. And "one or two" games? Must I dig out all my receipts, cut out all the UPC codes from the game boxes and mail them to you to prove that I buy games on a regular basis? Only difference between you and I is that I only buy games that I know I like and at the price I know they are worth to me.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
37. Re: Op Ed Dec 15, 2008, 07:23  dsmart 
 
@ Prez

As far as your point about legality, there is no gray area; what I do is illegal by any definition. However, I am much more interested in the morality of what I do. In my view, to download and use something without paying for it is immoral. To download something for my own personal use (NOT for giving to others) after I have paid for it is not. My personal guiding light in this matter is not copyright law, but "Fair Use"; that is to say I only use products for which the creator is properly compensated. Because I give the creator of the item exactly what they ask for, my conscience is clear even if I break the law through my choices in mitigating my own risk.

Oh I fully understand your position and point. No question about it. In fact, it is no different than people buying music on iTunes (I'm an AmazonMP3* man myself since there is *no* DRM) and then finding ways to strip the DRM and use their music on other players, computers etc. There is always a justification for trying to uphold "Fair Use", but when you think DMCA, all bets are off.

In fact, the law does allow for making copies of your owned purchase for personal use only. Of course if you don't know how to make those copies - due to the DRM - then you have to seek out someone else's copy that has the work done for you. Thats where the pirates come in.

tbh, as a gamer and game developer, I am torn by the whole thing. As I've said before, I have yet to meet a single game developer who favors DRM. Frankly it is more trouble than its worth.

The problem is that one would hope that more people buy PC games so that the piracy is lessened to the status of "acceptable loss" like the low piracy numbers of console games. But thats not going to happen because the international presence of PC games means that they will always be pirated and thus - in the absence of robut DRM - the piracy numbers will remain constant.

The only way that piracy on the PC is going to be lessened is when all games move to a client/server authentication model. Not the SecuROM or Starforce model btw, since you can bypass that by just cracking the authentication from the executable and bypass the server check entirely. Which is exactly what is happening now.

@ Tumbler

The whole experience playing games on the 360, start to finish, is superior to the PC in my opinion. And has been for some time now.

Whoa!! Them's fighting words!!! Wot? u trying to start a riot or something?

The PC has some strengths that I wish the consoles would incorporate, but if it comes down to the 360 having a better all around product for the price. Plus rentals makes it so easy to try games without dropping $60.

Indeed, but the console is woefully inferior to the PC. The saving grace for the console is that when targeting a specific platform, you can do more with less. The reality is that the PC will always be years and generations ahead of the console in many ways.

In fact, get this, we as developers can ALL develop console games that will run on the PC in near exactly on the console. In fact, we do that all the time during XBox development since there are certain software and hardware criteria that you can adhere to in order to somewhat emulate the console (in this case the XBox360) on a PC.

e.g.

(i) we can stick with 1280x720 WS resolution, ignoring the fact that the PC can go up to insane resolutions

(ii) restrict memory usage by allocating and using a single segmented pool of RAM and VRAM, ignoring the fact that the PC has more of both than any console

(iii) restrict controls to analog gamepads or the XBox360 Controller For Windows, ignoring the fact that the PC has the benefit of a joystick, mouse, keyboard

(iv) restrict the number of audio channels ignoring the fact that a typical PC audio card has almost twice the number of audio channels than a console.

...the list goes on but you get the picture.

The issue is that when you DO that - as some have in the past - there is an outcry from gamers yelling about bad ports, consolified PC games etc. Why? Because they expect us to cater to the PC's "strengths" in terms of audio, video, ram, controls and gameplay experience.

No game developer wants to spend four to six months porting a console game to the PC when we can just spend a month two to port the exact same game to the PC in a near "as-as" fashion. Especially when the end result is that it would never pay off financially.

The truth of the matter is that the number of worldwide PC games eclipses that of console games. Plus there are those who would much rather play on the PC than on the console. You can't ignore those numbers. Hence the reason that PC gaming is still going strong.

@ wowTIP

It might help if you'd try to make your point without injecting insane analogies into the discussion. They shouldn't be necessary, and if you've got a point to make, they simply distract from it.

As usual, you come up with your special brand of nonsensical commentary.

There was nothing insane about it. Because someone can't wrap their brains around it, just means that they are at a different level of understanding and comprehension. Nobody is perfect I know, but my point was clear and those who understood it, understood it quite well.

The fact is, you aren't less of the common whole just because you don't satisfy all the criteria that are a part of said whole. Now go wrap your head around that.

@ Jeryk

I already beat the game like a week ago but I liked it so I bought it. As I've stated repeatedly, I buy the games I like. Does that make me a gamer..?

Again, you missed the point I was trying to make Jeryk. Just because you buy one or two games, but steal others you'd rather not buy, doesn't make you any less a thieving pirate than the person who steals ALL their games.

This comment was edited on Dec 15, 2008, 07:28.
 
Avatar 9141
 
Game developers are just human beings who happen to make games for a living. If you want to hold us up to higher standards of conduct, then go ahead
...but don't be surprised if we don't uphold them
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
56 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo