A brief history of gamers bending over for the industry

Latias fan · Jul 11, 2011 9:25 PM

2000: PC game DRM becomes commonplace to combat those then-newfangled inventions known as "CD burners (which had been around for a while, but weren't exactly mainstream yet). Advantage: Gaming industry

2000: PC gamers revolt and stop buying PC games with DRM. Game developers largely cease the practice. Advantage: Consumer

2001: The last of the major game developers stops accepting "opened" games from retailers except in case of defect. End result: Gamers no longer have the ability to return a game that turned out to be horribly made. Advantage: Gaming industry

2002: In-game advertising starts to become more commonplace, starting with Sam from Splinter Cell reaching for a Sobe and walking past a television advertising Nivea for Men (some instances from the 90's, but isolated). While it would take another 3 years for the practice to become commonplace, it is now routine to find these ads in-game. In many instances, the in-game advertising is downright intrusive and comprises a large portion of the game (ex. Fight Night Round 3) Net benefit to consumer: None, as the cost of the game does not go down, and the experience becomes littered with commercials. Net benefit to the developer: Millions. Advantage: Gaming industry

2005: Guitar Hero implements the first game to implement wide-scale DLC. In spite of the songs they release as "add-ons" mostly being covers as opposed to original works, and costing the company almost nothing in development due to the non-graphic nature of the game itself, they nonetheless charge double what the actual song would cost on iTunes. Advantage: Gaming industry

2008: Soul Calibur IV releases with DLC that is actually already on the disc. It becomes known that what you are purchasing is not "new content" developed after the game was released, but nothing but an unlock code to release a character that already exists on the game itself. This practice is now commonplace today. Advantage: Gaming industry

2008: EA releases "Spore" with DRM so archaic, the game can literally not be legally played unless you have an internet connection, whether or not you plan to interact online. This makes it impossible to play the game in places such as airplanes, remote locations, or areas where you have limited connectivity. Furthermore, 'Spore' has a limited amount of installs per license key, meaning that if you frequently upgrade your machine or reformat with any regularity, you will eventually have to call EA to ask for another key, which they hinted they might charge you for. Advantage: Gaming industry

2010: Electronic Arts starts implementing an "online pass", charging consumers $10 to access online content to their game after a one-time use code has been exhausted. Advantage: Gaming industry

2010: Sony Computer Entertainment reaches into original SKU Playstation 3 units and retroactively removes a built in advertised feature, OtherOS. Predictably, numerous lawsuits arise. Sony attempts to defend these lawsuits by claiming that the consumer doesn't actually "own" the Playstation 3 unit, they are merely purchasing a license to use it from Sony and that Sony can do whatever they please with the features. Advantage: Gaming industry (for now, as the class action suits are ongoing).

2011: Sony announces PSN pass, something very similar to the EA pass. Sony games going forward will now have one-time use codes that are PER USER ACCOUNT, and that any additional users who wish to use the online features of legally owned games must pay a $10 per user fee to access online features that essentially cost nothing. Advantage: Gaming industry

Not a whole lot of advantage: Consumer in there, eh? Don't worry, 10 years from now this list will include being forced to pay full price for a game via download only, having to pay a fee to "re-license" the game if your console breaks and you get a new one, games with a series of microtransactions that are necessary in order to complete a game, and in-game "commercial breaks" where load screens currently reside. I think the video game industry is going to drive itself to the ground. I'm glad Nintendo are still old fashioned and hasn't caught onto this trend yet

Source:A Gamefaqs topic

ontels · Jul 11, 2011 9:47 PM

You don't have to buy there games it's just buisness.

JazzJackrabbit · Jul 11, 2011 10:45 PM

What about that game (forgot what it is) that allows one save file that can't be reset?

Latias fan · Jul 11, 2011 11:16 PM

JazzJackrabbit wrote:

What about that game (forgot what it is) that allows one save file that can't be reset?

That's a new rule Capcom is enforcing. They did it with Resident Evil 3D. And all future Capcom games will have it.

Neotyguy40 · Jul 11, 2011 11:52 PM

I'd like to point out that Spore does NOT require an internet connection each time you play. I've played it without internet on dozens of occasions, and just to be sure I tried it out right now disconnected. It requires a connection to activate it, but not any connection afterwards.

And remember, there are a few things that were both good for the industry AND consumers. For example, Steam is practically a DRM full application, but allows for cheap and convenient games. The DRM inside of it does not affect the user at all (literally invisible). You just need an internet connection to download the games.

riverhippo · Jul 12, 2011 10:40 AM

Neotyguy40 wrote:

I'd like to point out that Spore does NOT require an internet connection each time you play. I've played it without internet on dozens of occasions, and just to be sure I tried it out right now disconnected. It requires a connection to activate it, but not any connection afterwards

I have Spore and it requires you to register online when you play it for the first time. It does not require you to play with an internet connection, nor does it require you to even play with the disc in the drive after you've installed it onto your computer. What interests me about the Spore item on this 'hit list' is that it was defined 'illegal'. Why would EA allow you to play a game offline if it is considered 'illegal'. Where does it say that playing offline is illegal?

And for this argument, I refused to legitimize everything with legality. Everyone knows the cracks in the gaming industry are very wide. I'm not saying it's "OK" for people to steal downloads, I'm just saying it's not necessarily fair when you don't include people taking 'advantage' of torrents and uploads of illegal copies of gaming programs when listing the corrupt nature that exists in the gaming industry. It's a one-sided argument.

#1 Jul 11, 2011 9:25 PM

A brief history of gamers bending over for the industry

#2 Jul 11, 2011 9:47 PM

Re: A brief history of gamers bending over for the industry

#3 Jul 11, 2011 10:45 PM

Re: A brief history of gamers bending over for the industry

#4 Jul 11, 2011 11:16 PM

Re: A brief history of gamers bending over for the industry

#5 Jul 11, 2011 11:52 PM

Re: A brief history of gamers bending over for the industry

#6 Jul 12, 2011 10:40 AM

Re: A brief history of gamers bending over for the industry

Board footer