My opinion on DRM and used games

Well it's been a hot topic that just wont die down. Ever since the invention of DRM in PC gaming, people have had some reason to realize they can't just pick up any copy of a game and play it. It's one of those things to fear in a gaming world, and there's a pretty good reason for fearing it if you ask me.

I've looked into this chat before, and it can get quite interesting. I feel awful and sympathetic for so many people, because I have yet to see a solution that doesn't involve someone getting hurt or suffering (unless of course magic happens where retailers and devs work out a deal). If you live DRM free and allow your copies to exist everywhere, developers and publishers don't get their potential funding. If you protect them by killing the sales of used games, the customers are hurting and retailers that used a trading system are now hurting their own potential. If you make a game rely on extra purchases (inner game markets, pre-order overdose, or big DLC plans), your hurting the core design that could have been shipped in a more full and fun experience rather than having people shell out cash over and over again after they bought it to begin with.

Next problem I have with the situation is that it's such an odd gray area full of so many emotional opinions, questions, and arguments that people from all sides look like idiots. I'm not sure if I'll be any different, but one of the things I'd like to do in this article is reflect on why some arguments of both sides are flawed or hold less water than they'd like to admit. Lets start there, I'll start with the favored internet standpoint and point out some of the stranger anti-DRM arguments made and shine some light on the holes in their logic. Trust me, I'll be revealing the pro-DRM swiss cheese amount of holes soon enough as well.

Common Pro-Used Game Arguments

What's next, used cars are banned? What makes games so different?
Ugh, I hate this argument. I really do, and it's sadly one of the most popular ones. What makes games different? How about everything! This argument has got a point to it, but it's lost in how specific it is. Look, it isn't about cars. It never was. Used cars are a different thing altogether. Parts need changing or more worn, seats can be torn up, it's not going to be spotless, and there might be a funny smell or some weird choices tied to that car. Used games aren't nearly this... well used. And that's what countless anti-used guys will bring up, and it's becoming somewhat of a pinata smashing fest for them because of how easy this argument is to poke around with. The point that got lost is the concept of basic trade, and while it's awesome that this type of trade is done with cars it doesn't have to be the golden example because it simply isn't. Nothing is that I can think of. Any physical object or anything that really exists can have tradable value, so it's not as simple as saying "if cars can do it, then anything can". No. Just no. Go to something else while we're talking about digital entertainment on a disc, how about DVDs, Music CDs, or heck even a used vacuum cleaner would be a better comparison than a freakin' used car.

I can't afford to buy everything new, I'm too broke.
Right, so you want to protect your typical 5-10% discount discount on used games because your too poor to go to that "extreme" of paying $4 more for a new copy? Oh you poor thing (note the sarcasm). Used games can lead to cheaper prices, but not quite in this sense. The DRM crew is worried mostly about people like gamestop and those play 1 week, sell the next week type gamers. Used games will drive costs down, and I'll get to more on that in a minute, but it's not going to save starving children and broke families. Heck, even if that was the case, this is a video game we're talking about. If you're "too poor"to help your own industry, then go look for a new hobby because it's just not in your range. If you really want bargains or need them because your poor you can simply wait out the game. That, and now we're seeing a huge indie scene that welcomes great games for lower prices at the start. When you can get such outstanding triple A embarrassing games like Torchlight 2 for $20, $5 on sales, etc why are you trying to worry about protecting your $4 gamestop discount. It's ridiculous.

Ok so if I can't re-sell them, that kills the disc after I'm done with the game!
I thankfully haven't seen this statement much, but when I do it makes me cringe. Look buddy, if you bought the game willingly thinking it had limited value but then turn around to complain it had limited value, your kind of stuck in a strange loop you made. You're not guaranteed to re-sell that disc even without DRM, maybe nobody wants to buy it off you. Another thing is your re-sells are usually in the form of gamestop... and if this rings up as true then I'm sorry but that's just a stupid plan you had to begin with, and the disability to re-sell is doing you a favor. They'll often take multiple used games off your hand for some pocket change. But that's getting sidetracked into my biased hatred of those sell within a week gamers. Getting back to the subject, you simply can't use this as an argument for used games. It's not exactly holding any water or making people feel like they're entitled to let you sell your game. What you're doing is basically complaining you can't re-sell your coffee after you just drank it. If you bought something you'd know was expendable to you, dispose of it in your use, you aren't entitled to get that money back. Whether it's a cup of coffee, fired bullets (which can be expensive depending on the type), an empty box of pills, or now a digital device played from start to finish there was never any guarantee that you'd be happy with your device forever with some money back guaranteed at the end. I think you should be able to do what you want with your game now, even if it is stupidly trading it off for a couple of cents, but this complaint as it is wont hold water on the subject. Your better off talking about how it's better to have that free will and control over a product you own... which is basically putting this argument up with the car one, it's got a point buried within it but the point is made so sharply specific to something so silly it makes the argument dead on arrival.



Common Anti-Used Game Arguments

DRM is great because you support your developers!
Ok that's nice. I'd love to support developers for putting their hard work into making fantastic games. However you know what isn't fantastic within games? DRM. Yeah I'd like to support Diablo 3, but hey they want me to tie everything to my internet and their servers because I don't own their game, I'm just renting their servers. Fuck that, I'm not supporting their games until I see a turn of events... which means I'm waiting for PS3 Diablo 3 and will just have to stick with StarCraft 1. Hey, look Battlefield looks fun but you know who buys that? My dad who bought it in mind to share between the two of us, and do you know who can't play it because of their stupid online pass? Anybody except my father who had to tie the stupid code to his account. I'm out of that, and discouraged my father from supporting them again. Well... maybe I'll rent their future title and see if things work out better so that me and him might go for it again, OH WAIT no nevermind that DRM screws with your ability to rent something. Guess I'll continue putting the game on my blacklisted section because I can't do anything to figure if it's worth taking off that list. Oh hey, new game is coming out... darn it's by another one of those guys with an online pass, I'm sick of entering those codes. Yup, supporting your devs when they're punishing you for it. Awesome argument there DRM fans (Sarcasm strikes again!). Stop and think for a second, how is DRM putting more money into the pockets of developers? What, I give them $10 of an online pass to make up for the $60 I avoided giving them? I have to steal an activation code? Wake up for a second and think that outside of awareness, DRM is giving nothing of true value back to the developer. It is only hurting the gamer. When the developers or publishers are hurting the gamers, they have failed their job to deliver fun. They have failed and do not deserve my support.

Ok throwing that bit aside, lets just say the argument was just about getting people to support your devs. That's nice, but this was supposed to be gaming. It's about having fun, not money. Even as a developer, you should be putting fun first and letting the money evaluate how well you did in that, not seeing how many ways you can get money off of people by teasing fun. Used sales are into more than gaming. It's not cheap to make cars, guns, a full album of music, and movies but those can be traded off without a dime going to the maker and yet these industries are well and alive. Gaming isn't a charity, it's not about giving off money to people you like, it's about getting entertainment you value. It's a hobby and fun based industry, it will last that way with or without re-sells and it's a lot more fun without obstacles so lets hope you get the ability to have full ownership, ok. Gaming has survived for plenty of years without DRM and it's done fine, it's just that control and need for "moar money" has gotten developers and publishers thinking that anything that can be done to get more money and see every penny should be done. This is evident not only by DRM, but by the cutting corners, by the lousy priorities, by the rushed releases and milked franchises, by the political nature that gaming is becoming. It's no longer just about that child-like sense of fun that thrived before DRM, it's got to be about "the industry" and making sure people get cash. That's not exactly something I can agree with. I will happily support a worthy developer, and I agree that it's the right thing to do, but don't shove that in my face or punish me when I prioritize fun in a fun industry over it. The only duty I have as a gamer is to be a passionate player, I don't need EA, Ubisoft, Activision, Crytek, Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, Quantum Dream, Epic, Blizzard, Capcom, Square enix, Bethesda, etc telling me how I should be giving them more money. That's not what gaming is about, and that's not what it should come down to.... ever! Especially from publishers, they're far more responsible for the problems we have now than anything else factoring into this.

Screw gamestop, those rich bastards can rot while DRM takes over.
Yeah, contradicting a bit much? Something that baffles me a bit more than most things is this idea that Gamestop and other "rich" guys can go take a hike because our poor rich devs need more money. Look, last I checked Gamestop aren't exactly the bad guys here either. They are successfully selling used games because of the consumer. They are successfully rich because they offer a service people like. They are the big game seller that you go to if you like your games to be a physical thing of joy instead of slapping random and high amounts of data and memory onto your limited console and PC machines. Yet apparently they're evil because they're rich. I'm sorry, but these "99%" rejects can go take a hike while the big boys resume a real debate. These guys aren't doing any more harm than a casual yard sale. They're just a lot more rich and successful because it's a whole business doing it, that's not exactly evil at all.

A Digital only future without re-sales will be a victory for everyone!

Nice wishful thinking there. Ok I may have to explain this one a bit... You see there is a theory out there, growing thanks to the help of some PC fans that feel spectacular over being able to tolerate this DRM crap longer than everyone else. The theory is everything will be better when everything transitions into a steam-like situation. Steam has no way of getting used copies, so steam sales happen because developers can afford it to happen, steam has amazing daily deals, steam doesn't feel like DRM so you can happily play your games, etc. You should be able to follow the main message now, basically digital only is supposed to be a liberating feature where devs get every penny sold and gamers get cheaper games. In theory, it's not such a bad idea and being very hypothetical it's hard to argue with. But in my attempt to do so, I'd like to point out some W40K games that are still $30 despite being $20 and under elsewhere. I'd like to point at how I got quake wars and the special edition rage (new) for $5 and could for over a year while steam wont touch quake and only had rage match that price for 8 hours on a special event sale before reverting back to $20.  I'd like to point out how steam is one of the few areas doing these price drops when they do happen, though it's competing with a few other PC sites. Meanwhile PSN and XBLA refuses to do such and wont ever match their retail prices. "Oh, but that's because people can buy them used" you say, well if the devs were worried about that they would beat them with the digital price to begin with and see more money in direct sales instead of letting the used and normal retail sales directly beat them while new sales on the digital store stay at day 1 prices for the first half of the year. Then I'll also bring up that I got Prey 1, Quake 4, and some mythology RTS game for $5 and under as well at small little mom n pop shops. Steam would love to charge me quadrupedal... or at least for one game, they don't even bother to have the others. Used games end up offering more benefits... actually heck it's not even about used games, it's about physical copies. If you let loose 5000 copies of Sims 3 I can gaurantee you they wont stay a solid price forever. Meanwhile if you check up on Journey or Demon souls in PSN, Dawn of war 2 retribution on steam, and the virtual games on nintendo's market they are the same price as they entered that store. Digital games don't have to go down, physical copies do unless they're in a suffocated market. That's just a fact, and we can see this in practice now even while steam and PSN have competitors. Likewise you actually get ownership over physical copies , or at least if DRM hasn't leashed you to the internet with a big middle finger to the consumer. That's something your digital paradise world wouldn't ever see thanks to possible lawsuits if something were to happen to these services. And you know what, while I'm at it I would like to point your attention to this: http://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/1/828937979095845728/ Oh yeah online DRM. It may not be always on, and it may not be a problem for everyone even when they lose a connection briefly but it's one of many issues that do exist with offline mode and as a whole you can't expect gamers to universally accept steams conditions.

There's a big reason why steam is a great little world, but not exactly the monopoly: it simply shouldn't be. It has it's flaws, it has it's limits, and it doesn't have what console gamers have been loving for years. They love renting, trading, borrowing, loading a game up and playing it FROM A DISC, and just enjoying the feeling of a dedicated gaming machine that was marketed, crafted, and made with support from a company that had gaming on it's mind when it made that machine. *cough* *cough* not microsoft *cough* *cough*. It's why there is PC and there is consoles, even if PC is the "superior" choice it's not a final solution and a monopoly and it should never try to be so. Let console gamers keep their abilities and PC keep their side. Keep things open for choice and fun because when it comes down to it this is about gaming!


In Conclusion:
Wait, is this my first time actually using the font size tool like I should? Anyways I kind of summed up things throughout these points, especially the last one. I don't think consoles would really be around with a crap ton of DRM, and likewise I think a lot of those gamers would disappear as well. However we're also seeing a backlash that's needed in the PC community as well, and quite frankly at the end of the day nobody likes DRM... unless the publishers are seriously delusional enough to think people are enjoying their online only restrictions, clients, stupid activation codes, and other such nonsense. Meanwhile used games can be more of a gray area when it's well known that they strip developers of their owed money. But then again at the end of the day, it's not just about them and really this shouldn't be a problem if we desire continue to enjoy the free market. Markets should work like this where we have the ability to sell things we own... and without a doubt why shouldn't we be capable of buying and owning our games? It would be a shame if the entire world just woke up to find flee markets gone, no yard sales, no auctions, people looking to black markets over key codes to everything, and the fact that every single thing you own is tied to you and dies with you. That's not the type of world I want to live in, and I don't see why game publishers and developers are trying to push that sort of thing on us and demand we feel bad because we don't live in that kind of world. Used games tie into our rights on owning the games as well, so as far as I'm concerned if you're going to say no to DRM it's not hard to find your side on used games as well.

 I grew up in at a time when these policies and politics in gaming simply weren't around, and I really wish that sort of thing would come back. Buying spyro without being forced to tie it to a console, account, or person was great and there wasn't anybody crying over it. Yeah it was pirated, and yes I'm sure someone bought it cheap off ebay. But guess what, insomniac is still around and despite doing some sucky stuff they still survive even in this costly age without shoving DRM on us. They even broke made an exception of EA, who later decided to scrap online passes because it didn't work. Because they don't use DRM, the fun that was had with spyro can still be had today on the original console because people can still buy it on Ebay, can still find it in rare stores that sell PS1 games, and still have a damn good time as long as they have something to run it... it'll stay that way to the end of time and at the end of the day fun prevails. I dare you to say the same dark spore, your falling apart with less age due to your stupid server reliability. The latest sims was falling apart since day 1 and still has been for people last I heard. That's not what gaming is about guys, try again. Steam can stick around, but let that be an option. Let retail copies free to fully own and use as the buyer pleases also roam on the same timeline. In the end that's the best way to reach the goal of fun and to let gamers enjoy their hobby the way they want. I personally want as little as possible getting in my way of entertaining myself on a game. Maybe every once in a while the only way I can do that is by buying off of Ebay, but if it's a serious hobby of mine (and it is) you bet I'll still support developers but it's a world without them crying for it that I came to love and support... not them begging for attention and asking me to donate to them like some charity and making my life miserable even if I was going to support them with DRM. That's not gaming.... gaming is fun, DRM is not fun. End of discussion.