pc
Steam DRM Vs Spore DRM
Posted by Brian Crecente at 12:00 AM on September 19, 2008
Spore's digital rights management and copy protection has gotten a lot of people up in arms. The reaction has been so strong, with nega-reviews flooding Amazon and DRM creatures flooding the Sporepedia, that Electronic Arts said they're planning on implementing a patch to loosen up their current installation guidelines.
But Electronic Arts isn't the only company to ever use a built-in online copy protection system. A small company called Valve, publishers of such indie titles as Portal, Half-Life 2 and Team Fortress 2, knows all about the ups and downs of DRM and copy protection.
Back in 2004 Valve was at the heart of a hurricane of controversy surrounding the use of online authentication after their relatively new digital distribution system, Steam, ran into a hiccup and was unable to keep up with the online validations for mega-hit Half-Life 2. But things have run relatively smooth since then, with the exception of a major outtage in 2006. I talked to Valve's Doug Lombardi yesterday to ask how they've managed to smooth out the wrinkles of DRM with Steam and how their copy protection compares to Spore's.
"Half-Life 2 was one of the first games to require authentication to play the game and require it with an online component, prior to that you had CD keys," Lombardi said. "There was a lot of pushback about that at the time. It was two-fold. One was social engineering on the part of pirates. The other was Steam, in general, at launch time, was busted. It wasn't nearly as elegant as it is today."
"Since then we have stayed with the same system and put a lot of hardware behind it and made (authentication) more immediate."
Lombardi, and others I spoke to off the record, say that at least for digitally downloaded PC games, DRM and copy protection is here to stay. For Valve the biggest push is to lock down those "zero day" pirates. Day zero is the time between when a game goes gold and when it is available for purchase. Lombardi, and many others, are convinced that that's when a bulk of piracy occurs.
"That's the biggest problem," he said. "I'd be willing to guess that well over 50 percent of piracy occurs then."
"I think our solution solves the game zero piracy."
The key to making a good authentication system, Lombardi says, is to not stand in the way of customers enjoying what they bought. A bad system is like telling a customer "Wait, before you go on this roller coaster you need to change your shoes," he said.
As with SecuRom, Steam's validation system has a number of options that are left up to the game developer to decide. Like how often a game need to be authenticated.
"They can make it the first time on purchase and never again or they can do it every hour," Lombardi said.
For instance the authentication and rights for Spore and The Orange Box through Steam are fairly similar:
Number of concurrent installations
Spore: While EA says a change is coming to allow deauthentication of computers, currently Spore can only be installed on three computers total in it's lifetime.
The Orange Box: There is no limit to the number of computers it can be installed on. You just install the Steam client, but can only play on one computer at a time.
Spyware
Neither Spore nor The Orange Box have anything akin to spyware built into their copy protection and DRM systems. Lombardi calls spyware, or even the perception of spyware, the kiss of death in the gaming business.
Authentication
Spore: An EA spokesperson told me that Spore only checks authentication when you first install the game.
The Orange Box: Every time you play the game online Steam checks your authentication.
Number of accounts per a copy
Spore: Despite what the manually erroneously states, only one account can be created per a copy of the game.
The Orange Box: One account per a copy of the game.
It seems as we move forward, toward disc-less gaming, DRM and online copy protection are inevitable. The only question is how they will be implemented. What do you think the DRM sweet spot is?

Comments (AU Comments · US Comments)
Korwin
Posted September 19, 2008 9:13 AM
Personally I feel steam is the best method of PC DRM. Generally the only thing that irk's me about Securom DRM is the limit of installs. When i purchase a product i should be able to un-install and re-install the game as many times as I please, i didnt fork out full price for a glorified rental. With Steam this issue doesnt exist, I simply login anywhere and use my liscense for the software. Steam's DRM works, and it doesnt cause any tears.
timbo1138
Posted September 19, 2008 11:18 AM
Quite simply: Steam. Purely for the fact that once you buy a game it gets tied to your Steam account and can be downloaded and run it on any machine you like. The only time Steam's authentication got in my way was when Half-Life 2 came out. Since then, I've not had a single problem getting a game to run, which is more than I can say for SecurROM. Bioshock and Mass Effect both gave me trouble initially, though I will say that Spore has thus far not presented any problems.
It comes down to the value proposition. Does the system give me a good experience, or a bad experience? Thus far, SecureRom has given me an experience that is *mildly* bad, in that it's been irritating and slightly inconvenient on a couple of occasions. Steam gives me a system that not only just works, but which contains a huge number of other, valuable features that enhance my gaming experience.
Dale Williams
Posted September 19, 2008 1:33 PM
I'm actually a bit annoyed by Spore's DRM. I haven't bought alot of PC game's lately. I'd figured that, like a console game, I could give it to a mate overnight and he be allowed to play it - rendering my install unusable until the copy is returned. That's the way it works with any other possession. I can lend my guitars, my consoles, my DVDs... why can't I lend my PC games?
In order to obtain a possession, you must possess it - the transferal of possession is implied by the nature of the term. I thought I was buying a copy of Spore, not a small window of opportunity to play it in.
deadjesterx
Posted 12:25 AM 19/9/08
@deadjesterx: Also like how the authentication is left to the developer, not Valve. With EA the devs pretty much get strong armed by the exects to place the restrictions on their game. Just read between the lines from the recent comments by the Red Alert team. It feels like their saying "Look, we're really sorry about this guys, but it wasn't our decision."
deadjesterx
Pepek
Posted 12:24 AM 19/9/08
I'd say one of the differences is 'trust', people trust Valve for obvious reasons and don't trust EA for obvious reasons. SecuROM is suspicious to people. For a good reason.
Second, Steam doesn't get in the way and you can get rid of it anytime you want.
Pepek
Taheen
Posted 12:22 AM 19/9/08
i dont think any authentication realy helps against pirates, there is always a crack or workaround somewhere
Taheen
cdammers
Posted 12:21 AM 19/9/08
"For Valve the biggest push is to lock down those "zero day" pirates. Day zero is the time between when a game goes gold and when it is available for purchase. Lombardi, and many others, are convinced that that's when a bulk of piracy occurs."
Look, I love Steam, and I don't even have a huge problem with DRM in general (although the limited, non-refundable activation systems are absurd). But this is bullshit. They're trying to solve a problem that has, by their own admission, very little to do with their customers, by putting the burden on their customers. If "day zero" piracy is your problem, address that. Go digital only - no disc makers and no retailers equals no piracy between gold and launch. Tighten security in your supply chain, identify where the leaks are occurring and punish them.
cdammers
AlienRopeBurn
Posted 12:20 AM 19/9/08
DRM should be transparent; it should be clear what's being installed on your computer, where, and why. Trying to be secretive about what DRM does only helps the pirates, since they'll bust it anyway, provide a more user-friendly version, and give your product a bad rep to boot.
AlienRopeBurn
deadjesterx
Posted 12:20 AM 19/9/08
I like Steam. It's authentication system is really no different than, say, an MMO. I can install it as many times as I want, on as many computers as I wish, and I can actually delete it if I don't want. SecuROM, on the other hand, sticks to your computer like a damn face-hugger from Aliens.
deadjesterx
Cocytus
Posted 12:19 AM 19/9/08
As long as an online check is made to authenticate ONLY when playing online, and not while enjoying single-player (or on a submarine).
For games that may have more than one person, say in a family, playing them, don't hinder it. Allow for multiple save-games or multiple accounts, however progress is tracked.
Allow me to re-install my game as often as necessary.
Keep the lock against simultaneous online use.
Cocytus
Piemonkey
Posted 12:17 AM 19/9/08
It's mainly the "three installs only" that's causing the uproar.
Piemonkey
cabjf
Posted 12:16 AM 19/9/08
I actually don't mind the Steam model of being able to check in when I load up the client. It's more like when you play and online game and have an account; it's the account that ties that game to you. The added bonus with steam is that one account can be associated with multiple games. The downsides with steam are that the client is kind of slow (in my experience anyhow) with a poor user interface and if a game requires authentication every time you want to play, you may not be able to play even an offline game without an internet connection.
cabjf
mcderek3000
Posted 12:15 AM 19/9/08
All the games I have on Steam run singleplayer with only the need to authenticate once, although I don't have The Orange Box (my provider is currently blocking Steam, so I can't buy it.)
mcderek3000
Lockgar
Posted 12:15 AM 19/9/08
At least half-life 2 didn't install a program you couldn't remove by conventional means "you can get rid of steam if you want to :)", and didn't stop you from trying to use your burner. I'm sure we all live programs that eat up memory in the background that we can't shutdown no matter what.
Lockgar
Scorpinox
Posted 12:14 AM 19/9/08
My feeling is that pirates screwed this all up for the rest of us. It's like a store that used to constantly get candy stolen by some assholes, so finally the store decides to put the candy behind a locked case, and now no one wants to wait for the guy to open the case just for some damn candy.
Scorpinox
Entegy
Posted 12:12 AM 19/9/08
Steam has the better idea. Checks my authentication every time I go online? That's fine, I can still play/install it on as many computers as I want! Can't play on the same copy on different computers at the same time? Who the hell shares Steam accounts anyway other than going to a friend's house and showing them?
Entegy
penetraitor
Posted 12:11 AM 19/9/08
Never had a single problem with steam. I love it. I could go to a friends house and log in with my account if I wanted and not have to bring a disc or remember a cd key or anything. It is a great service and I have seen a number of people implementing the same thing like with Stardock and impulse.
penetraitor
Hirmetrium
Posted 12:09 AM 19/9/08
Oh please. We all know how the "backdoor" of secuROM works, opening ports without your permission to authourise and let a load of nasty spyware in.
I'd still rather stick the disk in the drive than put up with this shit. At least Steam works flawlessly now, and I can always reinstall half life 2 for episode 3 and the like. Whereas spore, I am forced to never install it again and call up some bullshit tech support line for them to tell me that I can't install it again.
Hirmetrium
PATSCRU
Posted 12:09 AM 19/9/08
Lombardi's right, when DRM gets in the way, that's when i don't even bother. However with Steam and the Orangebox, you don't even realize that there is DRM at all, and everything is gravy. I have OB installed on 3 computers. It's great because with steam i can back up my saves on my main computer at home, take my laptop on the road, and resume HL2 where i left off and not have to even think about any DRM whatsoever.
PATSCRU
Chobie
Posted 12:09 AM 19/9/08
I don't have a problem with Steam but I do have a problem with Spore.
I was wondering if I should install it on my laptop (my 3rd machine) the other day and decided against it in the end as I didn't want to use the last authentication.
It's things like that, that makes me swear I'll never buy another game with DRM protection like Spore (Even though I bought that...)
Chobie
Twoflower
Posted 12:08 AM 19/9/08
The critical difference between Steam and Starforce is that Steam doesn't secretly install fake device drivers and other hideous bits of software which can only be removed with the digital equivilant of the jaws of life.
Starforce does. It's bordering on spyware with the amount of integration it does with your OS's core, whether you wanted it to or not.
I don't mind software keeping me from copying it (DRM). I don't mind paying artists for the work they make. I just don't want my computer screwed over in the process, or my ability to install and reinstall at will.
Twoflower
CordableTuna
Posted 12:06 AM 19/9/08
"One was social engineering on the part of pirates."
YARRR! You all shall now pirate Halflife or walk the plank!
CordableTuna
jccalhoun
Posted 12:49 AM 19/9/08
I've never had a problem with a Steam game. I've had at least 3 games with Securom on them that wouldn't even install. They all choked during the install process even though I tried 3 different dvd drives from different manufacturers and 2 different computers.
Securom has kept me from installing games I legally bought. Steam hasn't. I buy games with Steam. I don't buy games that have Securom on them.
jccalhoun
Atrius
Posted 12:48 AM 19/9/08
@Nesagwa: Not entirely true. I bought both strong bad episodes through wiiware. I could have done the same thing on the PC. But you hit the right point. If my wii goes down then I lose both those games, unless I somehow get Nintendo support to help me out.
Atrius
Knasher
Posted 12:48 AM 19/9/08
My biggest problem with steam is that I wish they had some sort of offline authentication. Either phone based or web based, like maybe the client can save an authentication token to a usb key and you can upload it on a website and get a validated token to unlock steam. Just some sort of backup so that if your stuck in a situation with out internet or blocked steam you have some way around. Its happened to me that my offline account has got invalidated and I had to drag my whole pc to a friends house to get it back... Very annoying. Other than that I love the steam platform.
Knasher
Atrius
Posted 12:45 AM 19/9/08
@Smash_Bro: I-tunes is evil. You don't notice when everything is working, but try and do something that they don't want and *boom*.
For example, windows died on my compy so I installed linux. Suddenly I can't play any of the music I downloaded on my compy, but at least I could through my ipod. However, the compy couldn't talk to the Ipod touch anymore (not without some work at least). In any case I got it all straightened out, but then my ipod died because I washed it. Then I couldn't access any of my purchased music at all.
I guess its probably the same for all of this drm stuff. As long as you do everything the way they want its unobtrusive, but if you push at the edges then it breaks.
Atrius
lumpi
Posted 12:44 AM 19/9/08
PS: Stirket that line:
- Number of concurrent installations
...EA likes to call it that way, in reality, it's rather:
- Number of installations in a lifetime
lumpi
Nesagwa
Posted 12:44 AM 19/9/08
@Atrius:
WiiWare isnt = buying a PC game.
Imagine if you bought Mario Galaxy for your Wii. You cant play it on any other Wii but yours. If you erase the memory on your console you have to re-authenticate it. But you can only do that 3 times before the game becomes a 60 dollar paperweight and you have to resort to installing a mod chip to play it without a hassle.
People would flip their shit if that happened on a console.
Nesagwa
arstal
Posted 12:43 AM 19/9/08
@cdammers: Not profitable.
@Smash_Bro: Look at Impulse. Their authentication is when you purchase, and when you patch the game, that's it. You won't need Impulse running for any game you play. Stardock's already said that.
@NiceMissMayonnaise: I consider Steam DRM, it really seems to make loading of games longer then it should be. I enjoy TF2 enough to put up with it, but I'm still annoyed.
That said, it's tolerable, unlike EA's DRM.
arstal
Inzoum
Posted 12:43 AM 19/9/08
You get this kind of treatment with downloadable titles on consoles as well, it's fine when done in good measure. PSN's DRMs are basically tied to your PS3 account account.. usually anyone can play so long as the "owner" account exists on that console, for up to 5 consoles. There's PLENTY of flexibility there, but it does prevent the "I'll buy it once and give it to every one I know" scheme... There are exceptions with stricter rules, but that's usually ok with me.
The problem with DRM and copy-protection systems is that they often try to kill ALL piracy, and have to resort to very intrusive methods to get to that. I'm sure it costs them a lot to implement, or at least it will when they hire real spies to check on each and every one of their customers 24/7. At some point it won't even be worth it anymore, financially. I think it's probably best to be pirated a good deal, and be appreciated by all (and keep selling future titles) than being pirated less and hated by all (and boycotted).
Inzoum
lumpi
Posted 12:42 AM 19/9/08
Well, two things I hate about SecuROM:
- Number of concurrent installations
- Spyware (which is a deliberately exaggerated word for a piece of software that acts in secrecy, is hard to un-install, blocks software around it or is just plain in the way)
Steam has neither of that. Steam needs the Internet as a hardware requirement, which is debatable, especially for singleplayer games. But there was an argument in 2004, an argument I didn't like very much then: "Just as all the new games need 3D-cards, they now need an Internet connection".
In 2008, having an internet connection as a requirement isn't that bad. Still, it gives the Company I bought the game from a kind of responsibility (having servers up and running so I can play) that I would rather handle myself. And it isn't flawless (don't ask a Valve PR person, that's like asking Weird Al Yankovic whether he thinks he's funny).
I'm getting regular and obviously incorrect "Steam ID expired" messages when playing Valve games online that require a restart. If you look at things like censorship measures (IP-logged censorship of the Orange Box in Germany, for example, something I have to deal with, NOT EVEN LIVING IN GERMANY, because the system is flawed and swaps over borders), so this issue shows its ugly head wide outside the pirate discussion.
I don't write Valve blanko-checks for Steam-praise, but, as a compromise, Steam is one of the better online System out there. You can call it a service. A mandatory service, but it doesn't feel very restrictive.
Stardock is still king, though. I wish Valve learned from them, that having mandatory activations for singleplayer games for EVERX TIME YOU PLAY THE GAME is bs. Not even SecuROM does that. Or at least EA says it doesn't. They sure know how to spin their facts.
lumpi
Mara
Posted 12:41 AM 19/9/08
@WordTipping: Agreed. SecuROM isn't mentioned anywhere on the Spore DVD box or the manual but it's still installed on your PC without notifying you. There isn't even an easy way to remove the thing and most people won't ever find out of its existence because all SecuROM files are marked as hidden. All those factors scream spyware.
On the other hand, it's made clear to everyone that Steam is there and for your own good. It actually offers something to the customer in return.
Mara
KaneRobot
Posted 12:40 AM 19/9/08
Digital distribution sucks in all forms, Steam included.
When I buy a game, I want to own the thing. The "convienence" of Steam isn't as convienent as having the DVD on a shelf next to me.
KaneRobot
Atrius
Posted 12:40 AM 19/9/08
I got Spore digitally delivered and haven't run into any DRM issues. Then again I haven't tried to do very much except play the game. I think it must be different for people who bought the cd, based on all the outcry.
My question is why nobody complains about these issues for consoles. I can only play my wiiware games on 1 machine.
As a side note: its nice that the wiiware games are always available for redownload. I lose access to spore in a couple months unless I pay extra. Then again it has to be the way it is for the wii because of the space issue.
Atrius
deadjesterx
Posted 12:40 AM 19/9/08
@Calhoun: Comment of the day. :)
deadjesterx
Eldragon
Posted 12:37 AM 19/9/08
When Half-Life 2 came out, I was REALLY, REALLY pissed at Steam. I bought the game on CD, couldn't play it without the CD in the drive, and I spent 5-6 hours trying to get the game to Authenticate with Steam before it could be played. I tried returning the game, both to the store, and to Valve directly (Valve wouldn't take it back). Then I installed the No-CD crack and got around the whole problem. I have since forgiven Valve and Steam, and yet I find Steam to be preferable over SecuROM.
I would prefer a system where EA had an online database to store your registered CD-Keys, so I could manage the authentication of individual PCs myself. No need to call EA at $2.50/minute.
Eldragon
CodeMunki
Posted 12:37 AM 19/9/08
Steam also gives the user something in return for DRM: convenience. It is convenient to be able download games you own to any computer you want and play them. It works great and doesn't get in the way. Having to authenticate one time over the 'Net is a fair price to pay for that convenience.
SecuROM provides nothing to the user in return for the restrictions of DRM. As a result, it is a bad deal for customers.
CodeMunki
Zodduska
Posted 12:36 AM 19/9/08
What all the people bitching about Spore DRM fail to realize (unlike Doug and I) is that it is in place to slow piracy at, and before, the initial release.
TRUST ME, it WILL be patched out before MOST people need to legitimately install it on more than three machines.
Zodduska
a44v589
Posted 12:36 AM 19/9/08
The thing that Steam does right for DRM is add value instead of just subtracting value.
The anti-cheat technology built into Steam makes it a value-add for anyone who plays online. Imagine what TF2 would be like with the wallhacking and other miscellaneous bad things that went on when, say, CS came out. So Steam adds some value to the equation by keeping that anti-cheat software up and running. Combine that with the built in and fairly speedy patching process and a lot of nice free content and the result is a nice package that overall adds a lot of value compared to what you lose by having DRM. Compound that with the fact that SecureROM doesn't exactly have a stellar reputation with respect to security problems and what you wind up with is Steam being a great platform for content, with a small but unobtrusive DRM built in.
Spore's DRM appears to just detract value and make the game, overall, less valuable.
a44v589
Smash_Bro
Posted 12:35 AM 19/9/08
I've recently decided that I'm not buying digitally distributed anything anymore.
iTunes is to blame for that, by the way.
I don't like the feeling of not owning the things I buy. Why am I paying full price to "rent" something?
I download a song to iTunes, transfer it to my iPod, then delete the song from iTunes to save space. Oh, wait, I cannot download the song again unless I pay for it... again. Whereas with a CD I could copy it over and over.
And now! Now iTunes will delete anything on my iPod that isn't in my playlist everytime I connect to the charging cable, so that I can't delete files to save space. I understand the "why" this system exists (to stop music piracy) but I don't steal music (even though it makes much more sense to do it) so why am I being punished?
It's the same reason I waited years for Spore and now won't buy it. I don't want EA telling me that I don't own the game even though I paid them for it.
I recently dug through my closet and found some old PC discs for SimCity and SimTower, two games I loved long ago. I was able to reinstall them on my new computer and play. Had these games come from the age of DRM, I may as well have thrown them away.
This is why retailers will continue to exist.
Smash_Bro
sqlrob
Posted 12:32 AM 19/9/08
@Cocytus:
Bingo. I wanted HL-2 for single player only. The computer I was going to build for it was not going to be attached to the net, and was to be the only Windows computer in the house so Steam elsewhere is not possible.
The announcement of HL-2 being Steam only (not download only, but it was Steam only, even the CD) completely ended any chance of me doing PC gaming again.
sqlrob
NiceMissMayonnaise
Posted 12:32 AM 19/9/08
You don't even think of Steam as DRM as it's just so unobtrusive and simple. I remember the mess it was with the original launch of HL2, but now they've smoothed the Steam platform out and internet connections are a lot more commonplace than they were at the time (which was still pretty common) you just don't notice anything.
@Piemonkey: That's the key part - make something unwieldy and awkward like putting limits on installs and it suddenly becomes blatant and annoying. Unlike Steam, whose lovely system actually makes such troubles as system reinstalls and new computers an easier task with your game collection sitting waiting for you online rather than packed away in individual boxes.
NiceMissMayonnaise
WordTipping
Posted 12:30 AM 19/9/08
To me the difference is easy. SecurRom is a pain in the ass. It's invasive. Steam is a value added piece of software. Valve has made their DRM system (Steam) a positive thing. It's nice when your DRM system is akin to a videogame version of Facebook. If other companies had a similar philosophy then I would be fine with that. I like buying things, I don't like buying myself hassle. That is SecuRom and most DRM system.
WordTipping
Calhoun
Posted 12:30 AM 19/9/08
Okay, the whole "social engineering by pirates" excuse is a load of crap, Steam was broken in beta and broken when it launched. It's a great delivery platform now, but it took a little while to get there. They offer to associate games I have purchased through their client with my ID, and they'll let me DL those games anytime I reinstall the client on the new PC. They also offer good deals on older titles that can be hard to track down sometimes. This is why it's a tolerable and even well-liked platform.
Steam is like having a police officer for an uncle. He's going to ask you where you got your new toys on occasion, but he's also going to give you a head's up when there's a a bunch of neat old stuff from the impound at low low auction-rate prices.
SecuROM and Starforce are like two guys you run into at Wal-Mart who help you carry your purchase home and then start smoking PCP in the living room and bringing strung-out tweaker girls into the house whenever you turn your back. Then one of them stabs you in the gut and steals whatever it was they helped you bring home from Wal-Mart in the first place.
Calhoun
Kajetan
Posted 12:30 AM 19/9/08
@Taheen:
"i dont think any authentication realy helps against pirates, there is always a crack or workaround somewhere."
Thats right. Online authentification and limited installes are only there to prevent selling used sales.
Can you sell a game, you bought on Steam or any other plattform? No, you cannot! You have to sell account informations. Which leads to a vivid market for "used" Steam accounts, when people make one account per game they buy, then trading the account.
Which makes this whole strategy of preventing used game sales, like the "strategy" to prevent copies, a little bit silly and dumb, doesn't it?
Kajetan
TetraNitroCubane
Posted 12:29 AM 19/9/08
The main difference is that Steam doesn't require administrator priviledges on a machine to work. Steam also doesn't blacklist processes.
SecuROM uses embedded nulls and high privileges to get its job done. Once some hacker finds out how to exploit that, that'll be fun. The program already runs silently and needs no input from the user to update itself. It also isn't removed when the game is uninstalled, so if it causes hardware problems, good luck getting rid of it.
Finally, Steam doesn't tell me I can't run certain programs. When SecuROM told me I couldn't run Process Explorer, a totally legitimate MICROSOFT program, it got a little to close to controlling for my taste. I said Fuck `em after that point.
Steam, though, is made of <3. Copy protection doesn't have to be nasty like SecuROM.
TetraNitroCubane
svetlana
Posted 12:27 AM 19/9/08
I wasn't even aware of this. I went out giddly and installed the game on my new computer, but of course it won't stay new forever. What happens when I get a new machine? Or, down the road, a series of machines? The same kind of rage will consume me that led to me dropping FFXI once and for all. Yes, I know, if you don't delete your stupid PlayOnline account it's fine, but to a certain extent it's the same deal. (Because I didn't know. Because they didn't make it abundantly clear to me. Because...grr.) I didn't want any emails or dealings with them while abroad, and I come back and smack. "You want to play our game again? Fork over another fifty bucks. Chump."
I sympathize with the raging Amazon one-star posters. Boo, EA. Boo.
svetlana
TheGreySpectre
Posted 1:15 AM 19/9/08
I don't mind steam since it doesnt care which computers I install it on or how many reformats I do as long as I am using my account.
TheGreySpectre
Nik in NOLA
Posted 1:14 AM 19/9/08
Total night and day situation. I've transferred my Steam account over like 5 different computers throughout the lifetime and currently have it on two different computers. Stardock/Impulse is installed on two computers. I'm not treated like a criminal when I want to carry over older games to new hardware. Spore OTOH does treat me like a criminal instead of a paying customer, which is the exact reason I'm not buying it.
Nik in NOLA
GrandfatherParadox
Posted 1:12 AM 19/9/08
No matter how you slice it, DRM blows.
GrandfatherParadox
Brian Crecente
Posted 1:11 AM 19/9/08
@UnnDunn: I ask about this every single time i talk to valve. I think I'm starting to annoy them...
Brian Crecente
UnnDunn
Posted 1:09 AM 19/9/08
What's going to happen eventually is Microsoft will offer an implementation of Steam (possibly in partnership with Valve, but more likely independently) that will be built into Windows and/or DirectX and provide trusted-computing-based authentication tied to your Windows Live ID.
There's altogether too much money at stake for this not to happen.
UnnDunn
Ryumeka
Posted 1:01 AM 19/9/08
The reason I like (or should I say not bothered by) Steam DRM is because Steam does everything for me. It's got a decent friends list interface with great chat. It allows me to download videos and games whenever I want, and gift games to my friends at any time.
Steam really has become a natural part of my PC life. It boots up with my PC and stays open till shut down.
Ryumeka
toejam316
Posted 12:56 AM 19/9/08
@cdammers: They did address that with Steam - their game discs are pushed out with encrypted content. Steam decrypts it for use, as well as all the other stuff.
toejam316
Daisuash
Posted 12:55 AM 19/9/08
That´s why i play in consoles, specially in this gen when the gap between PC and consoles has narrowed down considerably...
Daisuash
JPSmee
Posted 12:53 AM 19/9/08
Steam scared the crap out of me when it first came out. I won't lie.
Then I read about all the problems with it when it was launched, only reinforcing my fears.
Now, fast-forward two years. After a long hiatus, I decided I wanted to play some good old Half-life 1. I broke out my original CD, and proceeded to install it. Then I found I couldn't patch it via the Sierra (god, remember that?) servers, as they didn't exist any longer. Okay, fine. So I then tried to play counterstrike. Again, no go. I did some reading, and found that I could get all I wanted via Steam.
Begrudgingly, I installed the client. I entered the CD key on *one* of my disks (mind you, I had purchased one of those big box sets with all the expansions), and was greeted with a message thanking me for purchasing the platinum box set. It then let me install any/all of the games included (plus like 3 more that I didn't get with the box). Happy gaming for me for the next month before my PC committed suicide.
After re-building my machine, I installed Steam. Plugged in my account information, then proceeded to re-download/install all my games. No muss, no fuss. With Steam (now that it works), I actually feel a sense of security when it comes to my games. I *know* that if I lost my CD, or my computer died, I can always just get it again on my next machine. The prospect of having to call someone to get permission to install something again (nevermind the reasoning behind it, there are plenty of legitimate reasons someone would do this, a la my story with HL1) is something that I find absurd.
I really really want to play Spore. I've been incredibly excited at the prospect of this game for some time now. All of that excitement has been sucked out of me. Sure, the game looks fun, but I really don't want anything to do with the particular DRM EA chose to go with.
Hey here's a thought . . . put Spore on Steam. I'd absolutely buy it then.
JPSmee
Nesagwa
Posted 12:53 AM 19/9/08
@Atrius:
Thats a flaw with the Wii system, all games are tied to your hardware. Which is convenient to a point, but it could cause problems.
Which leads into the 360 method, tying a game to both your hardware and live account which lets you transfer a game to any xbox as long as you can log into live.
Neither are really a good comparison to PCs.
But yeah, DRM. Hey the game is pirated on day 1 and everyone that bought the game is punished by shitty software. Makes perfect sense.
Nesagwa
Norellicus
Posted 12:51 AM 19/9/08
As many others here have said, DRM inherently isn't a problem. I'm all for folks wanting to protect their property, as long as that protection doesn't directly inhibit me from being able to use what I paid for as I like, and to do it with zero interference in the rest of my completely unrelated activities.
SecuROM violates these principles, while Steam does not. Pure and simple.
Norellicus
DarkMirage
Posted 1:39 AM 19/9/08
The difference is that Steam offers a convenient service to the end user which happens to make DRM possible, thus making it a fair trade-off, while Spore includes DRM as a huge "fuck you" from EA with the users getting nothing in return.
DarkMirage
SicariusIV
Posted 1:36 AM 19/9/08
The "three installs only" part is the ridiculous one.
It would be ridiculous to have to download a pirated copy to install a game you already own, just because you had to uninstall and reinstall it a couple of times. Yet this is what EA is forcing people to do with Spore.
They didn't learn anything from the backlash that came with BioShock having the same kind of protection last year (at least 2K learned by removing the restrictions on installs later on but still...)
SicariusIV
gemetzel
Posted 1:34 AM 19/9/08
Steam is the way to go for several reasons.
In my lifetime I have purchased many gaems more then once:
8 copies of Starcraft and Brood War
6 copies of Half-life 1 ( not including the packages with Blue shift, Counter-Strike, Team Fortress, etc.)
5 copies of Dawn of War gold edition and Dark Crusade.
2 Copies of Beyond Good and Evil
Now that I have Steam, I will never have to buy these game more than once again. I hate CD keys and game discs. This way is perfect for me.
gemetzel
Ultraseamus
Posted 1:31 AM 19/9/08
I think Steam does a great job, it does not get in my way, and it actually allows to to load a game up once and forget the key code forever (which is good because that's what usually happens anyways). Heck, I can even lose the disks and still play the game on any computer anywhere I want. The downside would be if Valve died, and steam went with it, but hopefully that's a long ways off, and if it happens plenty of impostor sites will pop up.
Ultraseamus
scdnyc
Posted 1:30 AM 19/9/08
I hate Steam, having steam in the background is a no starter - and we back to where you buy something someone else can limit on what you do with it
I waited for the crack on both HL2 and EP1 before I got them - waited till the retail version of EP2 (J and R had it for 10 bucks) and got a crack for that too
They get my money, I just wont install Steam on my rig
scdnyc
elendur
Posted 1:30 AM 19/9/08
What happens with Valve goes under and the Steam servers stop working? Is it like when a DRM'd music server (Yahoo!, MSN) goes down, and all that money spent is now gone with the wind?
elendur
PreachingLlama
Posted 1:29 AM 19/9/08
@Smash_Bro: Get a Zune. The official Zune software allows you to copy music back to your PC, even if its a guest partnership.
(Don't know if it applies to DRM'd music as I don't have any)
PreachingLlama
antialias02
Posted 1:27 AM 19/9/08
The fact that I can install The Orange Box on every computer I own and play it on any one of them at any time is fantastic. I absolutely love Steam and the purchasing/playing experience it provides.
The xfire-esque social network they've been slowly expanding around the platform is also compelling. I love knowing when a friend is playing TF2, as well as having the ability to jump on his server. That's good stuff.
@GrandfatherParadox: Why do you say that? Realistically, DRM is the only way for publishers not to get royally screwed. And when publishers don't get screwed, gamers don't get screwed. The trick is finding the best system for it.
The case cannot be made, after all, that once a consumer purchases a box at a store, it's theirs to do whatever they want with. That's a common misconception regarding the way software works. It's still not really yours, you only (typically) ever purchase the right to install it and use it. The right, in theory, could be revoked by the publisher if it's being abused. Really, though, at most, publishers just want to make sure that only people who paid for a license are using a license.
Why is that such a bad thing? It's solid business sense.
antialias02
twinturbo2
Posted 1:26 AM 19/9/08
@Nesagwa: Is the same Nesagwa that posts over at the Neo-Geo.com forums? Awesome if true...
twinturbo2
Pezdispenser
Posted 1:26 AM 19/9/08
I haven't had any trouble with Steam, but I've only been with them since October 2007 (well past all the problems).
Pezdispenser
VishusBurn
Posted 1:23 AM 19/9/08
Steam beats "SecuRom" any day because it actually offers some benefits to it compared to traditional disc based game licensing whereas Securom can only be considered a loss for consumers.
End user licensing sucks any way you slice it.
VishusBurn
Firemane
Posted 1:22 AM 19/9/08
I still can't play Steam games in offline mode, totally lame.
Firemane
TheGreySpectre
Posted 1:19 AM 19/9/08
I don't have a problem with the idea of DRM, its just the way some companies go about it that bugs me.
Steams DRM actually makes things easier for the user as long as you have the internet, where as EA's DRM makes things way more of a pain.
TheGreySpectre
Skeith
Posted 1:18 AM 19/9/08
Steam had a rough start but now I prefer it to retail copies for many reasons. The community integration, fast patch downloads and the ability to play games where ever I am. I pretty much buy all my PC games through it now. Steam is an ideal DRM implementation since it neither gets in your way and offers advantages to using it.
Skeith
Kicken
Posted 1:18 AM 19/9/08
@Scorpinox:
I don't think I or anyone else should have to say to you that by no means does secuROM combat piracy.
You troll.
Kicken
DragonNinja
Posted 2:05 AM 19/9/08
@Zodduska: Spore was leaked a few days before release, Spores DRM is 100% bullshit, I but the majority of my games, but I have so many problems with my fairly old PC that I format every couple of months that just decided to download it, although for Spore 3 installs is planty to be honest, it's a rather average game, the space portion is boring an your colonies get attacked avery 2 minutes.
I know a guy that bought Mass Effect and used up all 3 of his installs in two weeks because he got hold of a new Hard Drive and a new Graphics card and formatted before installing each one, he called up the support line and they wouldn't give him a single install back and called him a pirate because he'd used them so quickly, he now downloads anything with limited installs instead of having to put up with EA or whoevers crappy tech support.
The only time EAs tech support line has been usefull to me was when I bought The Sims 2 and my cd-key wasn't on the manual.
DragonNinja
elendur
Posted 2:02 AM 19/9/08
@Coxswain: I think that's a possibility, but it depends on how the licensing agreements were written with the individual developers. Even if they WANTED to reset the authentication to "never authenticate again" I'm not entirely sure that they could on the games that were not developed in-house.
elendur
Rctdaemon
Posted 1:52 AM 19/9/08
And that first "similarity" is why I like and continue to support Steam: No installation limits, even though your account can only be accessed from one computer at a time. That is fair.
Rctdaemon
Coxswain
Posted 1:48 AM 19/9/08
Steam also allows you to run one account on multiple computers (though I don't think it lets you do it simultaneously), which is a life-saver for people with multiple computers, not all of which they have access to all the time.
@elendur: I would suspect that if valve goes under - and I don't see this happening any time soon, I believe they're pretty damn profitable - they'll probably release a patcher that resets the authentication to "authenticate never again" or something.
Coxswain
NKato
Posted 1:48 AM 19/9/08
@scdnyc: Here's a suggestion. Simply don't make Steam a StartUp item in your bootup list. Use the "msconfig" command in your Run dialog, and use the next screen to configure what you want to be the startup item and what you don't want to have start up when you boot the PC.
Steam, for me, is set to NOT load when I boot up thus it does not become a problem to me until I feel like playing a game that requires Steam (Insurgency, TF2, CS, etc), and it's easy to shut down Steam afterward.
People who still don't like Steam because of the "background" process issue are hiding in the past.
NKato
yakkowarner
Posted 1:48 AM 19/9/08
The key to making a good authentication system, Lombardi says, is to not stand in the way of customers enjoying what they bought. A bad system is like telling a customer "Wait, before you go on this roller coaster you need to change your shoes," he said.
Okay, Brian why did you not ask him after he spouted this... Actually Valve does make them wait if they can't connect to steam b/c they don't have an internet connection or the ports are blocked(they are in a sub in the artic or in iraq and not allowed to connect their personal machines to the internet and run steam.
yakkowarner
NKato
Posted 1:44 AM 19/9/08
@Zodduska: Right. The backlash is only pushing more people to the pirated versions of Spore anyway.
EA fucked up, admit it.
NKato
TetraNitroCubane
Posted 1:43 AM 19/9/08
@DarkMirage: Quite agreed, as people keep pointing out, but I think it goes a LOT deeper than that.
Steam doesn't just take high level privileges on a machine without asking, and it's easy to remove. It's much less shady, in addition to being useful.
TetraNitroCubane
Cell9song
Posted 2:30 AM 19/9/08
heres another bit of info that gets lost in the shuffle, EA actually CHARGES you if you decide you want the "privledge" of downloading it more than once. 3 yrs for $10. Its obscene.
At Least STEAM allows unlimited downloads.
Cell9song
Coxswain
Posted 2:25 AM 19/9/08
@elendur: I would expect valve to be forward-thinking enough to have covered a potentiality like this, but I'm pretty good at under-estimating the arrogance of electronics and software companies.
I will revert to my standard operating procedure of praying we never have to find out.
Coxswain
m-p{3}
Posted 2:22 AM 19/9/08
I currently use Steam and I find it a fair trade-off between usability and restriction. I once faced a problem with the offline mode not working properly (not useful when on remote location) but the problem is not happening anymore.
m-p{3}
MrGlass
Posted 2:10 AM 19/9/08
There is one key factor this article misses: The benefits offered by steam. Steams only registration is a hassle, especially when it was first launched, but once you've registered you have that game forever. Throw away your discs and CD keys, all you need is your steam login and you can download and install it again. In fact, if you somehow get two copies of the game (if you buy the orange box after having bought Half Life 2, for instance) you can send that extra license to someone else, through steam. Steam has a definite benefit to the user.
EAs system does nothing but cause trouble for people. Its all well and good to be able to deauthorize from the game, but what if my computer dies? How do I deauthorize it then? Worse yet is EAs digital download policy, only allowing users to redownload it for 6 months, unless they pay an extra fee. If I pay for something, I should have the right to it forever.
Also, I still have yet to see any DRM that actually stopped piracy. Pirates will always find a way past it. In the end of the day, the only people EA is stopping is legitimate users.
MrGlass
Shockadin
Posted 2:07 AM 19/9/08
For the authentication online every time you play thing, you go play games offline, just single player ones, which, of course, does not require online authentication each time you play it.
Shockadin
redgopher
Posted 2:05 AM 19/9/08
@Scorpinox: You have to accept that this is always going to happen. People are going to try to pirate software. Shit like this happens when companies don't truly understand this fact. Valve gets it -- and they've stated a goal for their DRM: zero day piracy. EA's goal is to "stop piracy" in general. That will never happen. So they try to lock it down further and further without realizing that it will always be cracked, and the more restrictions they add, the more they alienate their paying customers.
I love Steam. It's transparent, it acts as an ever-expanding bookshelf for my digital games to sit on. I save shelf space, I save gas, and I get more money to the developers by cutting out packaging costs and middle-men.
redgopher
usaevo8
Posted 2:53 AM 19/9/08
I accept transparent DRM like Steam but refuse to put up with BS like SecuRom and all the others. I still feel that a software license should be able to be sold or transferred to another user (like I would with a car or house). Will this happen? No of course not becuase of money grubbing corporate asshats.
ps- doing a search on google for DRM brings up the
"Related Searchs: spore drm" LOL
usaevo8
smartboydan hates college
Posted 2:52 AM 19/9/08
I love Steam. I've only had it for a year, but it has always worked for me, even in offline mode.
smartboydan hates college
Ultraseamus
Posted 2:44 AM 19/9/08
@DimensionWarped: It isn't like there is a significant number of people who are thinking to themselves: "Gee, I want to buy this game, but I can't buy it for another 5 days and I have to have it now! I'll go pirate it!"
You really think so? I think there is usually a couple of weeks after the game goes gold and people can buy it, many gamers are very impatient. Also there are many of them who will then choose not to buy the game since there is no point any more, and even others who were always planning on buying the game, but after playing through it decided they do not like it enough to own. Although I think the biggest source of this "zero day" piracy would be between various regions (mostly between Japan and the US).
Ultraseamus
BoboDaHobo
Posted 2:40 AM 19/9/08
I think Steam is a great example of fair DRM. The only issue I've ever had was trying to play Audiosurf offline once (but I think that also has to do with how Audiosurf constantly talks to the servers online). It's very fair DRM, you can play any game you've purchased anywhere you want, and with digital purchases, there isn't even a serial key to type in. No hassle.
BoboDaHobo
HikariOblivion
Posted 2:38 AM 19/9/08
My copy of Half-Life 2, bought in goddamn 2004, worked for me up until I gave it to a friend when I got Orange Box.
this SecuROM is bullshit that doesn't have the convenience or function of Steam, nor does it make the games last as long - assuming Valve doesn't go under, I can reinstall the contents of the box of Orange at any point, on any computer, without lifting a finger.
No "versus" about it. Steam is far more well concieved and is a help more than a hinderance.
HikariOblivion
DimensionWarped
Posted 2:36 AM 19/9/08
And I should note that SecuRom isn't bad only because it installs drivers on your computer, but also because it can just plan screw up. Every time I put Mass Effect in my optical drive and go to an explorer window where the optical drive can be seen, my computer freezes for upwards of three minutes. Same for every other Securom game. The shit is just buggy and has a horrendous range of compatibility issues.
DimensionWarped
DimensionWarped
Posted 2:32 AM 19/9/08
It isn't like preventing piracy before the game is released does a thing to impact numbers in the long run. Yes, most piracy may occur during that period, but all preventing that sort of piracy does is push back the time of piracy. It isn't like there is a significant number of people who are thinking to themselves: "Gee, I want to buy this game, but I can't buy it for another 5 days and I have to have it now! I'll go pirate it!" and then don't buy it when the game comes out.
DimensionWarped
Lyrai
Posted 3:19 AM 19/9/08
This is taken from a post on a board elsewhere:
"SecuROM in particular is poorly implemented. I'm conducting further research, but so far what I've found is this:
* It installs a shell extension which, among other things, prevents you from deleting 16-bit executables.
* If you want to play the game on a non-Administrator account, it installs a program which is always running, to monitor your usage.
* If it detects a program that could theoretically be used to bypass or spy on SecuROM itself, it will fail to run. Apparently, benign programs like (older versions of) Process Explorer, as well as programming utilities such as debuggers, trigger false positives, either if they have been run since your last boot or if they exist on your computer at all (I'm not sure which).
* It responds similarly to virtual disc drives. Since virtual disc drives are impossible to distinguish from normal drives on a certain type of connection, there is an astronomically high false positive rate.
* It also doesn't run if it thinks it's in a virtual machine.
* It mucks up your registry in a manner that could be used to hide a rootkit, though it is unknown whether a rootkit exists.
* If you upgrade (apparently) any part of your computer, it thinks that you've installed it on a new computer.
* All of the above remains on your computer even after you remove the game.
These things are apparently universal to any software that uses SecuROM, regardless of the specific enforcement scheme."
Lyrai
slight
Posted 3:18 AM 19/9/08
"There was a lot of pushback about that at the time. It was two-fold. One was social engineering on the part of pirates."
Oh please! Why would the pirates care? They were the ones getting a 0 day version (pretty sure there was one for HL2 wasn't there?) which they could actually install! It was the consumers that got f*cked by the HL2 launch.
I know several people who grabbed the cracked version because they didn't want the DRM.
Personally I boycotted HL2, despite having looked forward to it for ages. I only finally gave in to Steam when TF2 came out, but i still seriously object to the fact that if Valve goes bust my games are going to stop working.
I seem to remember a promise about TF2 coming out for HL1 too, which was why I bought that particular game :(
Bitter? Me?
Seriously though, the whole 'DRM slows piracy' thing is rubbish. It encourages it.
slight
Parsifal
Posted 3:17 AM 19/9/08
I bought Bioshock on Steam specifically because I had been told that their version did not have SecuRom...and it was only $15 at the time, which is /totally/ besides the point....When it came time to install it I hesitated, because I wasn't sure. The price was good but I had realized that I needed to know whether SecuRom was in there or not. I'm not going to go crazy and install it in't 15 different computers, but I buy for the long term. I install and replay stuff older than a decade from time to time. I'd like to know that I could still play Bioshock again, if I wanted...that and I just bought my new comp and I didn't want /anything/ sneaking onto it when it's still shiny and new. Had a bad enough time slapping Vista on the wrist and saying, "Dammit, no! I don't care if you think I shouldn't, it's my comp now STFU."
Checking online I got all kinds of conflicting accounts and when I tried to contact 2k directly to ask they told me they couldn't help me because they didn't handle that version, I had to talk to Steam. I checked the valve forums and got lots of conflicting views. There was one thread that did mention Bioshock on Steam having SecuRom but it was dated before 2k had patched the DRM software to loosen up on the install restrictions so I couldn't be sure.
I finally contacted customer support when I was happy that I had at least tried to answer my own question and the rep who got back to me said that they stripped it right out of their version, supplanted with Steam's basic validation system. He didn't really go into detail, so I'm mostly confident I'm good now.
Anyone on here already install the Steam version of Bioshock that can corroborate?
Parsifal
Poisonous Taoist
Posted 3:17 AM 19/9/08
@svetlana: Well, that's different. You would've known about the whole PlayOnline account if you had read the manual(s) for FFXI and PlayOnline. By the way, that POL account is free, so I dunno why you would cancel it anyway.
Poisonous Taoist
[ZTF]
Posted 3:14 AM 19/9/08
@mva5580: "How many people actually gave a shit about this stuff before it was announced that it would be in Spore?" Quite alot, actually, as evidence from the article. There was an uproar concerning the outcry of fans in regards to the DRM in Half-Life 2. Also, no one is making excuses for it being acceptable on the consoles, because that's completley retarded. Console gaming dosn't matter, duh.
[ZTF]
Crazy_Buffet_Happens
Posted 3:14 AM 19/9/08
@mva5580: it surely is on the way to consoles in some form or other. i wouldn't give up video games altogether but my tastes are broad enough that i won't have to rely on huge publisher's big budget AAA DRM'd to hell title to play something. i would happily ignore the greater part of the industry during DRM's worst and just "sudo apt-get install parsec47"
Crazy_Buffet_Happens
Slayve
Posted 3:13 AM 19/9/08
Steam is great, no doubt, but it does have a couple of fairly serious downsides. One is the obvious, that you need to be online. I shouldn't have to be online to play a single-player game. What if there's a storm and my net connection goes down? Even more common, what if I'm on an airplane and don't have net access? I guess I'll have to just play Peggle!
The other downside is the number of accounts you can have per game copy. This is not a problem only with Steam, of course (Spore has the same thing, as do some consoles), but it's particularly annoying to families where multiple people want to play and save their own games.
But as DRM goes, Steam is probably the best, and Valve has been pretty open about the system and they seem trustworthy. EA is out of their minds and, with this issue anyway, is acting like the arrogant, Big Brother EA we all learned to hate years ago.
Slayve
philihp
Posted 3:11 AM 19/9/08
Number of accounts per a copy
Spore: Despite what the manually erroneously states, only one account can be created per a copy of the game.
Typo: s/manually/manual/
philihp
Xerloq
Posted 3:01 AM 19/9/08
The difference with Steam is that it doesn't get in the way of playing the game. I can install most Steam titles on as many computers as I want as many times as I want all simultaneously. It just keeps you from playing multiple copies of the games online at the same time.
My only gripe with Steam is with multiple titles on one Steam account - it's too hard for me to be playing Portal on one PC, and another family member playing Team Fortress on another - Steam kind of breaks down there. On the other hand, I'd like to be able to buy second and third licenses for the same account so multiple members of my family can play on the same account.
I guess I have a second gripe - Steam DRM essentially removes the Right of First Sale - especially when I have multiple copies of the same title (e.g. 'Gift Titles') that I can't do anything with. I think I should be able to give (or sell) my titles to other Steam members.
Xerloq
mva5580
Posted 3:00 AM 19/9/08
This is all so idiotic.
How many people actually gave a shit about this stuff before it was announced that it would be in Spore? Where the freaking ENDLESS Kotaku articles and message board rants about this stuff before a huge mainstream game had it? It's like millions of people discovered DRM within Spore, and I don't get it.
Oh and by the way I absolutely cannot WAIT for the day that console games have the same DRM "limitations" that you all go crazy about on PC games. If you don't think that is coming, you're delusional. Whether it be through digital distribution, or these companies beginning to attach physical discs to 1 console (to reduce the used game market,) then we'll see how many people just give up gaming altogether because of your crusades against injustice.
You'll all whine and cry about how you're being wronged on the PC, but you'll make excuses for why it's ok for consoles. It's already started to happen with game installations, patches, downloadable content, etc. ALL things that people used to crap on the PC for having the extra "hassle" of having to deal with, but now totally accepted on consoles.
DRM is next, and inside you people know it. It's not if, it's when.
mva5580
Crazy_Buffet_Happens
Posted 2:59 AM 19/9/08
I bet EA will have a "solution" by having you purchase a specially branded "EA Hard Disk Drive" or something similar (even a whole EA PC) to avoid reinstallation/redownload fees. After all, when you rock EA's secure hardware there is ease of mind knowing you help take a bite out of piracy.
Crazy_Buffet_Happens
fuchikoma
Posted 2:58 AM 19/9/08
Steam: Checks your game against an online server when installing, making it as permanent as any webpage game if that server goes down.
SecuROM: Checks your game against an online server when installing, making it as permanent as any webpage game if that server goes down.
Steam: Checks for updates by default when it runs. Not a problem if you don't mind constantly running hoggy useless programs while you're not using them. Otherwise, it insists on updating exactly when you ask it to play.
SecuROM: Prefers to remain unseen... to a fault. You can't quit it. Good luck prying it off.
The key to making a good authentication system, Lombardi says, is to not stand in the way of customers enjoying what they bought. A bad system is like telling a customer "Wait, before you go on this roller coaster you need to change your shoes," he said.
"Alright! Time for some Portal!"
*steam is downloading updates*
"What? No... I don't care if it's updated - it already works! Let me play! Cancel!"
*downloading...*
*downloading...*
"Aw, F--- IT!" *fires up PSP or DS and actually gets to play*
*finishes handheld session*
"Oh? Steam is patched. Good for it. Too late." *closes*
(And yes, I know about offline mode. Offline mode is not the default for an offline game, and you still have to go online to set it to offline!)
They're both doing it wrong. Sell me a game that is mine when I buy it, or rent it to me for a fair price, but don't rent it to me and call it a sale.
fuchikoma
arstal
Posted 3:43 AM 19/9/08
@Crazy_Buffet_Happens:
Because other people pirating games doesn't hurt people who actually buy the game outright (outside of some lost sales to the publishers- which aren't that many) whereas DRM hurts legitimate customers a lot more?
arstal
strix
Posted 3:40 AM 19/9/08
The big difference here is that Steam is a great quality service. It may have had some hiccups in the past but it is a service that I love especially when they offer incentives by packing some products together for a sale.
Securom and the DRM that EA has been using is a complete joke and seems more like a virus to punish the paying customers to increase revenue after all the installs are used up and legit customers need to go out and buy new copies. The new patch EA is releasing is a step in the right direction, but they need to just ditch Securom and find a measure that isn't so restricting and intrusive to their customers.
strix
arstal
Posted 3:40 AM 19/9/08
@fuchikoma:
Your best bet would be Impulse or Gamersgate.
I'm thinking in 2-3 years Impulse is going to be a good alternative to Steam, except for FPS's.
arstal
Overlord44
Posted 3:39 AM 19/9/08
The sweet spot is none at all. I refuse to use Steam precisely BECAUSE it has DRM - when the service goes, bye bye games! I want to buy games, not extended-rent them.
GoodOldGames, which has been featured on Kotaku before has it right - NO DRM AT ALL. And shock horror - I want to give it money! Do I want to give any to Steam, or SecuROM games? No, no I do not.
Overlord44
akwinters
Posted 3:39 AM 19/9/08
Steam is the sweet spot of DRM. I have no issue with authentication, what I have issue with is the gimped install.
So long as I can play the game I paid for, uninterrupted and unfettered (as it is in Steam), then I have no gripes with whatever DRM is behind it.
akwinters
Zodduska
Posted 3:30 AM 19/9/08
@NKato: Ohh yeah, you mean all the sheeple falling victim to the pir8's social engineering?
And since the pirated version has all the content complete with online play, you made the right choice.. oh wait.
Zodduska
BobDelli
Posted 3:27 AM 19/9/08
EA's DRM doesn't even compare with Steam's, just because of that one bullet point: limited installs.
Three installs:
--Does nothing to hinder Day Zero piracy (Spore was "out" a week in advance of the release)
--Does little to hinder piracy in general (obviously the pirates have unlimited installs)
--Hinders legitimate customers by depriving them of functionality (1% my ass, over the course of three or four years it's probably closer to 50%)
--Actually incentivizes piracy by making the customer choose between robbing EA or getting robbed by them.
BobDelli
Eranmane
Posted 3:25 AM 19/9/08
Do you ever realise how awesome Steam is?
Do you?
Since I got The Orange Box in January, I've formatted my hard drive 3 times. Once as a general clear. Second to fix that erroneous install. Third to fix some Linux problems.
And all I had to do to was login to Steam. It'd fetch the files I needed, patches and all, so long as I was connected to the internet, I would have everything I needed to play by the end of that day.
My cousin, a WoW player, spent about 3 days searching for patches, utilities, installers... after he found himself with a requirement to install WoW and didn't have the disk.
If I want to re-install a game, so be it. Open Steam, right click, install game. No hunting for disks. No worries.
SecuROM isn't running in the background, watching and waiting, killing all process it deems to be threats, even if they're not. Steam is true DRM. It isn't a program that gets in your way. It makes it harder to pirate games. Much harder. But still, it's unobtrusive. It's just the games you have in your account, playable.
And the thing is, it's USEFUL. It's easy to get into games with your friends\clan members. It's easy to get games (I live in a small town, no game shops here). They're cheap (god bless the weak US dollar).
Steam is adware. God damn "UPDATE NEWS LOL!!>!" I don't care if it can be disabled. It is a real pet hate of mine.
Eranmane
Crazy_Buffet_Happens
Posted 3:21 AM 19/9/08
to be fair; how about kotaku drumming up gamer outrage against thepiratebay and isohunt as regularly as it points out DRM issues imposed by big publishers? as a paying customer for many titles i demand that these dubious torrent hosters be held accountable and suffer gamer contempt and scorn for the unparalleled pain they have caused gamers the world over
Crazy_Buffet_Happens
incognit000
Posted 3:21 AM 19/9/08
Personally I really like how Steam works for me. 99% of the time, it's like there's no DRM at all. And that's how it SHOULD be. If you paid for something, DRM should be like it's not even there. It should only be a little bitch when you didn't pay to play.
incognit000
Fifth Echo
Posted 4:04 AM 19/9/08
@PreachingLlama: It does apply to DRM'ed music. In order to play it when you've copied it from the Zune to a second computer, you have to be logged in to the Zune service to authenticate and retrieve a license, but all the DRM'ed, Zune Pass music plays off the PC - internet or no - once you have the license.
I've never tested how long the license lasts...but it works like a champ.
Fifth Echo
Gort23
Posted 4:02 AM 19/9/08
When I got new machine six months ago, I downloaded the Steam client, signed in, spent a couple hours downloading some things, and was soon playing again. No worries about activation limits.
Besides, I am a professional programmer and am often doing low-level stuff. SecureROM considers the tools of my trade (i.e. debuggers) hacking tools, and disables them. With Steam, I just unload Steam, and all the DRM is off. SecureROM is there even when I am not playing their games.
The trouble with SecureROM isn't that it is DRM. The trouble with SecureROM is that it is invasive, disruptive DRM. It is the difference between stopping shoplifting with a metal detector at the door (Steam) or stopping shoplifting by having security guards randomly frisking people in the aisles (SecureROM).
Gort23
TetraNitroCubane
Posted 4:01 AM 19/9/08
@Parsifal: Bioshock on Steam still has SecuROM on it - HOWEVER, the install limits have been removed since release. If you purchase it not through Steam, there is no install limit, but the SecuROM executable and drivers will be installed on your system. That means you can install as often as you like, within Steam's usage limits (i.e. no simultaneous play on multiple machines), but if you're running software that SecuROM doesn't like (virtual drives, Process Explorer) the game won't launch.
Plus, you're granting high-level privileges to SecuROM.
Take that for what it's worth!
TetraNitroCubane
shadydentist
Posted 3:54 AM 19/9/08
I'm thinking the major difference is unlimited installs on unlimited computers, auto patching, and community features. DRM is fine as long as it doesn't secretly install anything on your computer or stop you from using it how you want.
shadydentist
yakkowarner
Posted 3:53 AM 19/9/08
@fuchikoma: exactly and their are other issues... i.e. using ip blocking you move to another country... guess what ... your games ... either don't work or get removed.
yakkowarner
GarouDiams
Posted 4:30 AM 19/9/08
The thing about Steam is that it *adds value*. I have been a satisfied customer since buying the original Source Silver pack a few years ago.
You can set up a network of friends on Steam. You can run other games not purchased through Steam through the Steam client and use the Steam messaging client to talk to other people on the network (just like X-fire). You can "gift" licenses of games if you happen to buy them twice (still have a HL2 to gift).
Additionally, Steam keeps the games updated for you. It is quick and easy, and they are always running great promotions on game bundles. Games that have been "dead" for quite some time (on 3.5" or 5.25") come back to life with compatability modes.
GarouDiams
infestedDemon
Posted 4:17 AM 19/9/08
Spore could of been one of the best games ever...
infestedDemon
Solid_hedgehog
Posted 4:49 AM 19/9/08
Steam is MUCH better than Spore.
Solid_hedgehog
Brian Crecente
Posted 4:46 AM 19/9/08
@Crazy_Buffet_Happens: Do you think this story is "drumming outrage" against DRM?
Brian Crecente
Parsifal
Posted 5:20 AM 19/9/08
@TetraNitroCubane: So I just threw $15 down a tube, got it.
@Overlord44: If I recall correctly, there was a passage in the EULA that stated on the even of Steam/Valve folding, they were required to provide a "hard copy" of your purchased games as well as create unlockers that untied the content from the service.
@GarouDiams: Really? I know that is the case for The Orange Box, but I wrote to ask Steam Customer Support to specifically ask about buying a game twice and got this response:
"Registering a CD Key / Steam subscription to an account which already contains some of the games included with the package will result in all the games included in the package being bound to the account, even if some of the games were already associated with the account."
I wrote back to basically ask "Okay, but does that mean I have 2 licences for the game I already had, or did I just pay twice for it and that's it?". Hopefully I'll get a response in a day or so. If what you say is true, about having that extra licence, then I could go ahead and buy that Darwinia+Multiwinia deal (both are being sold together at half price) and then just gift Darwinia away.
Parsifal
Talleh
Posted 5:07 AM 19/9/08
I am happier with Steam then I am versus any other solution I've found. Yes you have to launch from their program, and it authenticates each time you play, and it's only one account per game, but the benefits of using the program outweigh the few negatives.
The ability to login to the account from any PC with Steam. A friend can sit on my pc, and login to his account and play TF2, or HL2, or install a game that's on his account he wants to play. If I lose my spore cd key, can I login and download the entire game again? Can I do it on as many PCs as I want? I don't think so.
Steam is basically a DRM system that works, does not hamper the user, but gives them benefits for using their system. Sure there are ways around steam, but there are ways around everything. Steam does not impose more and more restrictive rules to try and fight piracy, only to fail and end up making the end user hate it.
Talleh
francoamerica
Posted 5:46 AM 19/9/08
What exactly was wrong with the CD key system they used to use. Sure everyone could play Half-life single player for free, but you can still log into a friends account, download half-life 2 and go off line with it for free today. I think the multiplayer was a Huge selling point for games like half-life, expecially when you throw something like Counter-Strike in the mix. And a game like Team Fortress 2 has absolutely nothing to worry about.
francoamerica
BallPtPenTheif
Posted 5:41 AM 19/9/08
Zero Day piracy.. lol.
I remember the Publisher always being paranoid of the QA staff lambasting them with Draconian confidentiality agreements and protocol. And whenever a game was pirated they usually came down on QA like a sledge hammers assuming it was them.
It usually ended up being a leak of a production build that never reached QA that only the producers and developers had.
BallPtPenTheif
Qix213
Posted 5:32 AM 19/9/08
One thing the article fails at understanding:
the "Number of accounts per a copy" is a completely different beast for the kind of game that Spore is.
All people want is to logon under a different name, so that they can create things with their own name and play in their own version of the universe. Hell you could attach the accounts so that only one of the group can be online at a time.
Its the equivalent of different save games. Its not there to stop piracy, its there to try to bleed more money out of families.
Its little stuff like this that when combined with a multitude of other small annoying things that turns people against not only your game, but the company as a whole.
Qix213
jrronimo
Posted 5:29 AM 19/9/08
For as much as I love steam, I worry about the day when The World Ends and I have the last PC on the planet and all I want to do is play some goddamned Portal and I can't because no-one reverse-engineered Steam's Auth. Servers while it was still possible. I'm not even kidding.
That aside, I really like that I can buy a game that's a Steam Game, punch in the code and say "Steam, please install for me." and still have an installable disc to use as a backup if I ever need it for some reason.
jrronimo
Scorpinox
Posted 6:07 AM 19/9/08
@Kicken: I don't think I ever mentioned whether or not DRM works, just that it's annoying to everyone, maybe you should read a little more carefully before you instantly hit reply.
Scorpinox
Altima NEO
Posted 6:05 AM 19/9/08
I hate DRM but I love steam. Its magic is in its flexibility, where as Spores DRM is totally inflexible. You can install 3 times, and after that its up to EA to determine if you can install it again or not. Steam, install it anywhere, as many times you want, but only play on one machine at a time. I really dont care about authentication, or how often, Steam does that seamlessly. The problem with spore was how limited you were to installing it.
Altima NEO
spider2544
Posted 6:00 AM 19/9/08
@KaneRobot: the convenience never having to worry about scratching or losing a dvd is a hell of a lot better than the fuzzy feeling i get from owning a piece of plastic.
spider2544
Parsifal
Posted 6:25 AM 19/9/08
@GarouDiams: The following is from the knowledge base article on the "Extra Copy" policy for "The Orange Box:
--Do any other games available on Steam work this way?
No. This special offer only applies to "Half-Life 2," "Half-Life 2: Episode One," and "Half-Life 2: Episode Two," as stated above.--
It would be nice if it did. They have deals all the time and it really detracts from the value to go buy something and then see a package deal advertising that game and 2 others selling at a fraction of what you paid in the first place.
Parsifal
radiochief
Posted 6:22 AM 19/9/08
Man, Valve has hit the sweet spot.
When I picked HL2 in '04 I had no problem authenticating the game. But, I like a lot of others was very concerned about Steam at first.
Now, it's the bomb. If you are going to DRM for games, Steam has it right...
EA will never learn. They can't just copy Valve's setup with their EADM... No, there are limits... For computers... For activations... Some content you need to pay $6.00 just ti get the system to remember you purchased and downloaded the GD stuff (longer than 3-6 months)... Idiots.
Sometimes, I wish Madden Football would disappear as a revenue stream for them. Perhaps, then, maybe, they would be more agreeable to their customer's wants.
radiochief
Jawajoey
Posted 6:17 AM 19/9/08
It's the install limit that sucks. It basically means you'll eventually lose the game, due to OS reinstalls or what have you.
With Steam, I can let someone log in on my account, and let them play any game I have. I can lend them the game, basically, even though we won't be able to play at the same time.
I really like that I go onto any computer, get steam, then play any game that I own on it. That's awesome.
Requiring the internet for authentication at game start-up is occasionally annoying, but in this day and age, it's not a real problem. It's hardly more annoying than requiring the CD in the drive (though that's more easily hacked as well).
Jawajoey
Cochese
Posted 7:02 AM 19/9/08
I've been unable to play half-life 2 or any of the other games from the publisher because of the online registration. I can't get the internet where I live nor can I afford it. I do own a copy of "Half Life 2" but I will never be able to play it(unless they get rid of the online authentication.) I do know others who can't play it either, for the same reason. I have played and beat HL2, however, I had to do it at a friends house. :(
Cochese
Allcars
Posted 6:56 AM 19/9/08
Just put everything on steam and call it a day.
Allcars
linoth
Posted 6:45 AM 19/9/08
Here's the difference. I was grandfathered into Steam via a Half-Life version I bought back around 2000. Eight years later, I can still play Half-Life and the engine has even been upgraded so that it works on current-gen hardware and operating systems. Valve didn't turn off the authentication servers in 2005 saying "we've given them five years, lets make them buy something el