By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Good DRM vs Bad DRM

Pemalite said:
slowmo said:

 

So hypothetically speaking if XBO's DRM made your experience better you would welcome it with open arms?

No not a better experience... A more convenient and cheaper one, then sure. I actually would.


However, seems it's going to be the reverse that will happen, I.E. Price of second hand games will probably skyrocket amongst other things.

It doesn't make all DRM "evil", just badly made and implemented then forced onto the consumer, you think PC gamers were forced to use Steam when it first launched? :P No, gamers chose to use it because it's convenient and cheaper.


They "chose" it because the best game on the platform was exclusive to Steam, it took several years before Steam became anything like benficial to the consumer.  Don't rewrite history to make it seem like it was alwyas this benevolent service.  I'd argue that most of it's better services came out when it directly copied some of XBL's feature set.



Around the Network
slowmo said:


They "chose" it because the best game on the platform was exclusive to Steam, it took several years before Steam became anything like benficial to the consumer.  Don't rewrite history to make it seem like it was alwyas this benevolent service.  I'd argue that most of it's better services came out when it directly copied some of XBL's feature set.


Best game? Hardly. Half Life bored me to death and I still jumped on board.
In-fact, statistically you are completely far left it's almost humorous.
Half Life 2 sold what, 15 million copies? Steam has roughly 50 million+ players (That's larger than Xbox Live or PS+ folks!)
That then makes it roughly 30% of users on Steam actually own Half Life.

As for copying the XBL feature set, again. That's almost laughable, Valve never rushes things, like ever. - There is a reason why websites such as "Valve time" exists, it's because they take there time to release anything, even if it takes them decades.
To copy the Xbox Live feature set, release it in a relatively stable condition in under 10 months for a company that is actually really *tiny* from a manpower perspective is an incredible feat, not to mention Valve doesn't even consider Xbox Live to be a competitor to Steam, they're on completely different platforms so there is no need to copy something in 10 months that may have been a big gamble at the time.

Besides, if anyone should copy anyone, Xbox Live and the PS+ should both take a page out of Valves book and actually have some sales to write home about. - I'm talking 75% of entire publisher catalogues. - That kind of thing benefits the consumer greatly.




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

Pemalite said:
slowmo said:


They "chose" it because the best game on the platform was exclusive to Steam, it took several years before Steam became anything like benficial to the consumer.  Don't rewrite history to make it seem like it was alwyas this benevolent service.  I'd argue that most of it's better services came out when it directly copied some of XBL's feature set.


Best game? Hardly. Half Life bored me to death and I still jumped on board.
In-fact, statistically you are completely far left it's almost humorous.
Half Life 2 sold what, 15 million copies? Steam has roughly 50 million+ players (That's larger than Xbox Live or PS+ folks!)
That then makes it roughly 30% of users on Steam actually own Half Life.

As for copying the XBL feature set, again. That's almost laughable, Valve never rushes things, like ever. - There is a reason why websites such as "Valve time" exists, it's because they take there time to release anything, even if it takes them decades.
To copy the Xbox Live feature set, release it in a relatively stable condition in under 10 months for a company that is actually really *tiny* from a manpower perspective is an incredible feat, not to mention Valve doesn't even consider Xbox Live to be a competitor to Steam, they're on completely different platforms so there is no need to copy something in 10 months that may have been a big gamble at the time.

Besides, if anyone should copy anyone, Xbox Live and the PS+ should both take a page out of Valves book and actually have some sales to write home about. - I'm talking 75% of entire publisher catalogues. - That kind of thing benefits the consumer greatly.


And Counter Strike Source arguably one of the most popular online games EVER was only available on Steam, then there was Day Of Defeat, TF2, etc, etc.  People will happily sign away their rights to follow the best games.

Steam copied Live, you're in serious denial to say any different, hell they didn't even hide it with their achievements.  If you seriously want to defend that statement then there is no point talking to you.  Microsoft do some great deals for those who are interested, they frequently have 50% offers on games and DLC (or as we have now seen 100% 2 games per month now).  Only an idiot would not want more items to be on sale though.



slowmo said:


And Counter Strike Source arguably one of the most popular online games EVER was only available on Steam, then there was Day Of Defeat, TF2, etc, etc.  People will happily sign away their rights to follow the best games.

Steam copied Live, you're in serious denial to say any different, hell they didn't even hide it with their achievements.  If you seriously want to defend that statement then there is no point talking to you.  Microsoft do some great deals for those who are interested, they frequently have 50% offers on games and DLC (or as we have now seen 100% 2 games per month now).  Only an idiot would not want more items to be on sale though.


You have a good point with the achievements, I'll give you that, but that is something that's been copied industry wide, Origin, uPlay, PS+, Heck even mobile and facebook games do it now.
Converesly, Microsoft is attempting to copy Steam with the entire "gifting of games" idea, buying digital games online? Valve started that before Xbox Live did. ;)
Xbox Live origionally was just a multiplayer service, that's it, you couldn't buy games untill well after the launch.

Besides, that's purely nit picking and the entire point seems to have gone over your head, so I shall clarify it a little.

*In no way can a game company create a massive distribution games network with service across the entire planet, deals with several dozens of internet providers and content delivery networks, program various API's for developers to interface with in merely 10 months when your company is the size of Valve.*
It would be something that would have been in the pipeline for years, Microsoft and Sony can do it because they have 1000x the amount of software developers and financial pull and it was untried and new at the time which is a massive financial risk for a small company, a gamble even.

Edit: You also can't really call those "sales" either, I can't describe how bad that is in comparison to what Steam offers merely daily.
Quick look on Steam and there is almost 30 games discounted right now, that's not to mention that the games are cheaper to begin with.
During sale time Hundreds of games are discounted. A couple a games a month? Common, Microsoft and Sony can do better than that...
Not to mention all the big free-to-play games on top of it that are available on Steam too.




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

Pemalite said:

You have a good point with the achievements, I'll give you that, but that is something that's been copied industry wide, Origin, uPlay, PS+, Heck even mobile and facebook games do it now.
Converesly, Microsoft is attempting to copy Steam with the entire "gifting of games" idea, buying digital games online? Valve started that before Xbox Live did. ;)
Xbox Live origionally was just a multiplayer service, that's it, you couldn't buy games untill well after the launch.

Besides, that's purely nit picking and the entire point seems to have gone over your head, so I shall clarify it a little.

*In no way can a game company create a massive distribution games network with service across the entire planet, deals with several dozens of internet providers and content delivery networks, program various API's for developers to interface with in merely 10 months when your company is the size of Valve.*
It would be something that would have been in the pipeline for years, Microsoft and Sony can do it because they have 1000x the amount of software developers and financial pull and it was untried and new at the time which is a massive financial risk for a small company, a gamble even.

Edit: You also can't really call those "sales" either, I can't describe how bad that is in comparison to what Steam offers merely daily.
Quick look on Steam and there is almost 30 games discounted right now, that's not to mention that the games are cheaper to begin with.
During sale time Hundreds of games are discounted. A couple a games a month? Common, Microsoft and Sony can do better than that...
Not to mention all the big free-to-play games on top of it that are available on Steam too.

Well I at least agree with you on that point