it is because there are a lot of people who install the game on their laptop and desktop. That leaves only one more install meaning that if your HDD fails or Windows corrupts like it normally does after a while you have to call EA every time you want to reinstall the game. Basically even if you only have one computer you are basically screwed due to the chance of either M$ screwing up Windows viva an update or just system files corrupting. You have to realize how poor Microsoft's programming actually is and how easy it is for an HDD to go bad or fry. I had to re-install Windows XP Pro several times on my old laptop due to corrupted system files. This would mean that Spore would have to have been allowed to be re-installed by EA.

 While I am loathe to say it, I would say in-game advertising is a better way of going imo. I can't say I have a better system currently than DRM really which is why I do not go harshly against it. I just see it as a piss poor stop gap.

Valid point, but pirates will crack it no matter what, and it only takes 1 release and it will be up on every torrent server afterwards. The protection should be against the common man who can make copies but not crack worth a damn. Most DRMs are going overboard on DRM, way past simple copy protection and try to hit the pirates. That simply won't happen.

As an exmple of a DRM free game, UT2004 rocked in sales, given its demographic. You didn't even need the CD to play.

Yes, well, it seems like only the best of the best games do well when it comes to piracy...UT2004 did well because it was so awesome and appealed to all the shooter fans...it probably got pirated plenty as well.

Steam does pretty well against pirates...you don't see torrents of TF2 all over the place...so there are ways to prevent piracy to some degree.

edit:  I searched mininova.org for Spore torrents and the first 4 results added up to about 8000 seeders, 20k leechers; the first 4 Crysis torrents added up to about 1500 seeders, 2400 leechers; and the first 4 results for TF2 (a more popular game than Crysis now) added up to 7 seeders, 19 leechers...there were no more seeders after that...so they're doing something right...why not more protection like Steam?

Well the thing is, unless it is a private server online games cannot be played when they are pirated. Private servers usually don't have as many players if any at all and all that. TF2 has no single player component at all and you need to be online to play it and to play the official servers you need the official version. That's why multiplayer games, like Blizzard's, don't get copied as much as strictly single-player.

That's also why UT2004 went against all pirating, you could install a copy with your friend's cd, update it to the 2nd patch that came out (I think they released it literally 4-5 months afterwards) and then you were set. Online didn't check cd-keys or anything, because of that ballsy move Epic was up there with Blizz and Valve when it comes to favorites, well until they made a console version of UT3 and fucked up the PC version royally, but i digress.

If push comes to shove in regards to the DRM vs. piracy dilemna, retail distribution of hard media games will eventually trickle down to nothing in the not too distant future.

Either

- DRM becomes so draconian (severely limited installs) and inconvenient for the average buyer/user that the only people who will still put up with the hassle of retail hard media will be those without network accounts (vanishing demographic in PC gaming) who can only play a game if it's distributed by hard media bought through retail.

Or

- DRM is dropped (acknowledging that it doesn't stop soft crackers and freeloaders from stealing) and hard media distribution for PC games is stopped almost completely.

No more PC games on disc. No DRM installation tracking or disc keys needed. All games will be tied to individual user accounts (not individual hard drives or computers).

Direct to Drive, Steam or similar digital distribution methods only.

That would mean find a way to hack secured digital distribution servers and then find a way to create fake user accounts if you are that dedicated to piracy, or just PAY for your games like everyone who actively supports the industry.

There are still many people who don't have fast enough connections to download 4 gigs+ on their HDDs. Especially in the US surprisingly. Game sizes are growing much faster than the speeds of the internet. The interesting part is that the lack of speed in the US is due to companies being lazy MFers and just try to get more money, but that's a whole another issue for a completely different topic.

What about movies, though?  Those are probably as close a comparison to games that you can get.

As Vlad321 said, I'm all for something simple like requiring the CD to be in the drive, and copy protection to stop Average Joe, but anything else is overkill.  It makes the consumer put up with BS, and doesn't stop the game from being pirated anyway.

Some hurdle is needed to keep it from being too easy, but extensive DRM and install limitations are ridiculous.

I do not like to be treated like a criminal.

DRM like this stops me buying the related game. I have 4 PCs at home (two laptops and two desktops), three of which are online. All are capable of gaming. I reformat my HDDs about once a year or so, and install games on all of them. My copy of Civ IV has been installed at least 20 times alone, and that's not an isolated example.

Yes, I am still limited, as I typically need the CD or DVD in the drive to play an individual game, but I'm fine with that, as it's a rare day the same game is being played on more than one machine.

I'm not fine with a 3 install licence. It sucks. I will not buy a game with it. I have no desire to be at the whim of EA for later installs that I know I will make. No way. Not happening. Uh uh.

Perhaps I'm a minority with my individual situation, but I'm clearly not in the minority with my opinion of the DRM.