Shared publicly  - 
I've often wondered about this. Everyone knows that DRM gets hacked away within hours of a games release or sometimes even before if there is a leak/broken street date.

This makes the argument for DRM a little invalid. It might stop a handfull of script kiddies from hacking it but when the files are available online, they don't have to.

So why then, do games add DRM (more to start a discussion than anything) when the only people affected are the ones that have bought it, DO install it with the DRM in place and then get penalised for it.

Required login and authentication of ownership is all that is really needed and no I don't mean "Always on connection required" but Install, register with the publisher and authenticate the CD key against your account then get a new license from the server every now and then. No SecuROM, No Safedisc, No Steam DRM, minimal hassle. Would make gamers a lot happier and less frustrated when they have errors caused by DRM problems.

DISCLAIMER My views are my own and do not represent EA's decisions and thoughts on the matter.
IBRHEEM Frid's profile photoAdam Turvey (SilverRook)'s profile photoFausto Chavez's profile photoBarrie Tingle's profile photo
this has happened before like you say.... new tokens are issues against the keys..... but the folks issuing them use predictable algorithms.

make everything run from one executable...... that'll fuck with em
then have that executable checked against the current server version.
how about a dogtag style key that when you start your game up you have to have this in the USB for it to do an RSA key check ?
I agree that minimal is better.

Steam DRM works fine for me. Also the DRM used with bf2 and key register online and create sub account with EA.

I don't like always on or securom or ones that give you a set number of installs. some people are always tinkering and changing their system or re-installing windows.

one key thing about DRM, can you quantify how effective it is? i know there are examples of games that were pirated to death but what about games who added DRM and sold more in the sequel?

DRM has never make my experience with the product better. In BF2142 a while back I hated having to dig up my disc to play. That drove my switch to Steam. Pirates played with no disc and didn't pay. I should have the better experience.
even the 2142 method got worked around in the end.... users changing their GUID to avoid bans etc as long as you have an original account you could still circumvent it....... we had one guy on our server CONSTANTLY.... HEINZUSA..... we had about 80 bans for him in our banlist lol
It was very strange as BF2142 used SecuROM and it used it well but then when they used it on The Sims I think it was, it just ended up being a whole world of hurt for EA and the name SecuROM. Proof that even a DRM with a bad name to gamers can actually be used properly i.e. BF2142.

If anything gets between the gamer and playing their game purchase or limits what they can do with their PC then I'm not a fan of using it to "protect" a game as it just pushes people to want to get around it which usually involves cracking the game making the whole DRM implementation pointless.
Yeah but +Adam Turvey that was an unforeseen issue with how the game handled logins and was patched in 1.51. Bit late for the game but it did make it and lessons were learned... I hope.
.... lol ok fair enough i'll give you that one ;)

it was patched ? ???? news to me lol

still kept happening because the guy always played on our NS server on remagen.....

the fix must of been a placebo

i think DRM should be automatic seamless and invisible to the user.

if they dont know about it but its still doing its job then they are less likely to want to work around it.

edit... sry sometimes im a bugger for neatness - double posts are evil
Once I got a job, I went legit years ago. I buy my games. I do agree DRM hurts the experience for the legit user. I remember with bf2142 having to insert the disc to play when someone with a cracked exe didn't have to. the solution is provide value to legit customers, for example a discount to verified buyers on future DLC. I think BF3 on Origin has it more right than wrong. You need a valid key given by EA and the game is mainly online. I haven't even touched single player.
Yeah, although BF2142's SecuROM was a lot nicer than it became on later games. Eventually I got approval from EA and DICE to remove the DRM so people could play it without the disc and only then by proving it would still be secure. I told them that anyone would be able to play SP (is that so bad in 2142?) but to go online you needed an EA account with a valid CD key attached. They agreed and let it get patched out.
I think  the BF3 model is the way to go. Who can play ranked BF3 games without an origin account and a valid bf3 key? nobody right? I like how my games download and update without me going to unofficial sites to download patches.
BF3 uses the same system as BF2142 except not SecuROM but a different encryption on the exe :)
Add a comment...