World of Goo is a highly acclaimed indie game which has received rave reviews and won numerous awards. It’s a product of love from two indie game developers and from the beginning, it was decided that it would be released with no DRM. Just recently, it was posted on the World of Goo blog that they were recording a piracy rate of somewhere around 90%.
This seems like an interesting data point in the whole debate on DRM and copy protection. Often, people on either side of the DRM debate will make unsubstantiated assertions about the nature of piracy or the efficacy of DRM without any hard data to back it up.
World of Goo is not created by some large faceless corporation and it’s not exorbitantly priced. This should be precisely the sort of game which should be supported by those who claim to support struggling artists.
Was the decision to go with no DRM the right choice for the World of Goo creators? What implications does this have on the larger DRM debate, especially when applied to different media such as music and movies?
My personal opinion is that they maybe shouldn’t have focused on preventing piracy on the client side but provided additional incentives to buy on the server side of things. For example, restricting the ability to be on the online leaderboard could be restricted to one name per purchased copy which would incentivize people to pay if they wanted their name to be public.
The linked article itself says “either way, ricochet shipped with DRM, world of goo shipped without it, and there seems to be no difference in the outcomes.” which just supports the notion that DRM is ineffective.
I do agree that this seems like exactly the sort of game that should be more piracy-resistant, and which shows off the digital distribution model well, so it’s dissapointing to hear that.
Did the creators release a free trial version for users to sample? A lot of piracy stems from users wanting to evaluate the content before shelling out for it. If they failed to do that, I would expect a ridiculous piracy rate as well.
I don’t have any details about their methodology or how piracy rates differ according to the type of software but 90% is atypical using the BSA numbers.
I highly doubt their claim of 90% piracy rate after seeing their methods, but lets assume its real for the sake of discussion. Take Sins of a Solar Empire, a game from Stardock that used no DRM either, according to their own press release “As of September 2008, Stardock’s CEO, Brad Wardell, has stated that the game has sold over 500,000 units, with 100,000 of those being digital download sales, on a budget of less than $1,000,000. It sold 200,000 copies in the first month after release alone”. That means lots of people are very willing to pay for a good game even if they can get it for free. I’d be a lot more interested in hearing how World of Goo actually sold rather than their flawed piracy claims.
I wouldn’t infer this specifically because of Stardock’s lack of use of DRM.
People who intended to pirate Sins of a Solar empire go to their source of pirated games and download it. For other games, with DRM, they do the same - except the game is modified in a way or comes with a crack so that the DRM is defeated. So it’s the same result - some pay, some pirate… DRM has almost no effect.
On second thought, I suppose lacking DRM makes casual piracy like letting your friend install your game on his computer easier.
This is implied in previous posts but not spelled out: not all of the 90% of people who downloaded the game illegally would have paid for the game were no free copy available.
The question is whether enough of those people would actually buy the game to offset the costs and time of adding DRM (and the fact that intrusive DRM could hurt future sales). This particular example suggests not.
I agree with the OPs opinion however. I think there needs to be some added value to having a legit copy. When buying games in a shop, that’s a box, printed manual etc. Online games should try to restrict future downloads, support etc based on registering.
On the other hand no DRM means that people like me will get World of Goo and Sins of a Solar Empire and pass up games that DO have DRM. And yes, I have both, bought legally.
I notice that in discussions like this it often seems to be assumed that no one would simply be driven away by DRM.
Actually there’s almost always discussion in piracy threads about the ineffectiveness of DRM and even counterproductiveness in that it pisses a whole lot of legitimate buyers off while not harming the pirates. It creates the perverse situation where the pirated version of a game is actually of higher quality than what you can buy due to the disabling of the DRM.
People still do that? With a good connection, it’s easier to just download it yourself. And even if you borrow the friends CD, downloading a crack is absolutely trivial.
That was my original point - I’m guessing most piracy occurs through channels and by people for whom DRM is irrelevant. DRM only deters the most casual piracy.
I expect there are many people who wouldn’t buy/download a pirated copy, but who would use a friend’s. Just as there are many people who wouldn’t shoplift a book but who will borrow a friend’s.
Part of the problem with this piracy debate is that the sellers and the law want a definition of “piracy” that’s a lot more stringent than most people use in the rest of their lives.
True enough. Although most games just go with the serial number/cd in the drive protection, so borrowing from a friend still works. Which makes the DRM totally pointless…
Gta4, been waiting for this game forever. now that its out for pc I still dont own a copy, why? the drm is obscene and the port to pc was evidently performed by monkeys instead of programers.
but the drm is a joke, my Aunt who has a legal copy of every sims2 expansion and assorted goodies plays on several different computers, no I dont recall all the drm but sims2 did have the disc in tray to play requirement which I fixed for her with a few minutes of searching/dling to find her the no cd crack. she has to deal with the drm in spite of paying for a legal copy when I could download the games with the no cd crack installed for free. who has the incentive to pay for the game that is a headache out of the box?
This is why there has been a mass exodus away from PC game development and towards console development. Piracy is virtually non-existent on current gen systems (360, PS3 and Wii). I’m sure there are exceptions to this but I haven’t met anyone who has a pirated copy of any of games for these systems. The shit runs rampant on PCs because they aren’t made for games. On the consoles the avg gamer can’t hack into the system and pirate games or steal downloadable content or crack the 360 encryption or whatever. On PCs any monkey can do that shit. I never pirated a single game in all my days but I did grab a copy of Mathcad once and it took me about 5 minutes of searching online to get a torrent put up (first time) and get the software installed on my system no problem. You just can’t do that with consoles yet because the hardware manufacturers have that shit locked down and by the time the avg user can do that we will be on to the next generation of consoles.
On the flip side of the argument, Spore topped out as 2008’s most pirated game, and most would agree it was directly because of its DRM. The crippling DRM from EA caused a massive backlash and most refused to buy it (but hey, they still wanted to play…). If that doesn’t complicate things, I don’t know what does. DRM or no DRM, there’s always going to be piracy. I think a good approach would be to coax people to purchase the game by offering additional benefits – basically what they did with DVD extras.