Gamespot editors, reviewers, and other concerned gamers,

There is great uproar over the DRM present in the recently released game, Spore. This allows buyers to install the game only 3 times through protection known as SecureRom. This protection is not new. It has been used in a variety of games by a variety of publishers, but is gradually becoming more restrictive. Having the discussion is great. Gamers are making their voices heard.

The problem I have been noticing though as that very few editorial reviews even mention the DRM of the game. Gamespot's review of Spore makes no mention of any install limit or artificial limitation.Some might say that DRM simply should not be included as part of a game's review. I argue otherwise. Just as my system limits my ability to play a game, an install limit, such as that found in Spore limits my ability as a purchaser to play the game. Also, as I still install and play my copy of old games to play once in a while, an install limit takes away from the replay value. Both are considered in reviews, and I request, nay demand, that reviews from Gamespot, or any other reviewer, detail any DRM restrictions that go beyond the norm

Red Alert 3 is planned to include the same DRM found in Spore, with a limit of 5 installs instead of 3. I would like to see mention of this in the review that I am sure is forthcoming

Thank you,
A Concerned Reader

Side Note: I was unable to find a way to communicate directly with the editor, so I chose to post my correspondence here.

Well, if you read the whole post, that's kinda the point. System specs and replayability are taken into account, but DRM is not. Also, the box does not list these restrictions. Its stated somewhere in the EULA no one reads.

I understand that the reviewer may not care about DRM, but I think most consumers would not like the idea of an install limit on games. I think it is something important to include in the discussion of any game.

Probably, but try telling that to the reviewers.Vilot_Hero

Thats the idea :)

as much as I'm indifferent to GS's review, the so-called *professional* game review follows the film review: they review the game itself regardless of the distribution system.

now, DRM is a small cake actually, the biggest problem with Computer game as *product* is that it's non-refundable/returnable once it's opened, and yet it's all-mighty EULA is not on the retail box...most of us see it just before we install the game, by that time, the game is already unrefunable/unreturnable.

all these years, fans just spoil corporates through the passion for supporting developers...they take us for granted: what's the point of the *disagree* option while we cannot return the game if we disagree the EULA?

Just as my system limits my ability to play a game, an install limit, such as that found in Spore limits my ability as a purchaser to play the game.shocklancer

No it doesn't. It doesn't limit your ability to purchase the game at all. What it does is influence your desire to purchase the game.

Also, as I still install and play my copy of old games to play once in a while, an install limit takes away from the replay value.shocklancer

You're mistaken. Most install limits merely prevent you from installing the game on multiple computers, it doesn't limit how often you can install and uninstall the game on those computers. And if BioShock is any indication, install limit DRM is patched out after around six months. No one is going to go through five computers in six months unless they're an idiot. Spore was patched to five installs within a few days of release, by the way.

You'd be better off basing your opinions on information from Wikipedia, rather than information from Amazon user reviews.

I'd like to see mention of the DRM in reviews, although it should be informational purposes only and definitely not have an influence on the score/rating.

Depending on the implementation, it can have an effect on a gamer's typical/normal/usual gaming experience --- basically it can affect their expectation (w/o getting into who is right, who is wrong, etc with any expectation at this point).

In my situtation, system requirements for example have been nearly meaningless for me and my expected gaming experience for quite a while now, I buy any appealing game without those concerns and confidently feel it will run on my systems. The DRM, however, would be much more valuable information and can cause me to give more thought to a potential purchase.

Part of the reason I'd like to see the DRM implementation mentioned in reviews is because it's not always fully disclosed without some personal research. Hopefully, if anything comes from the EA lawsuit, it will be full disclosure.

The latest form of DRM is rather new though, let's see how things play out. For instance, are reviewers even sent copies of games that include the final DRM implementation? Thus, would they even be able to ascertain that information for us? Alternatively, does the publisher even know the final decided implementation to inform the reviewer? This new form is flexible, it's easy to change the install limit for example.

Anyway, I personally would like to see it, but don't count on it, and let's see what happens.

In my view, as much as I dislike DRM, I do not think it is up to a game review site to highlight what DRM a particular game contains, or adjust their scores as a result. They should simply review the game on its own merits, and score accordingly.

It is up to the publisher/developer to ensure they 'come clean' about the copy protection/DRM they are using, so that the end user can make an informed decision about purchasing their product. I've said it before, but I think they should really include the logo of the copy protection on the game packaging somewhere, with a clear message if there are limited activations, internet activation, etc. Of course, it would be great to have access to the EULA before making a purchase as well...but I very much doubt that will happen.

Lastly, as much as I hate EA's new DRM, I do have to give them credit for making their intentions public knowledge. They made it clear when Mass Effect PC was released that future PC games would have similar DRM. At least now I can make an informed decision, and choose not to buy any future games published by EA. Other publishers should follow suit and be more open about the DRM measures they intend to use, including the brand of copy protection, as people who have experienced problems with certain copy protection schemes (as I did with SecuROM 7.xx) would then be able to avoid a nasty surprise.

9 out of 10 people may never encounter a problem, but for those who do it is a real pain in the butt trying to deal with it. In my view there should be legislation forcing 'FULL disclosure' in the gaming industry, because right now they are simply abusing their position to the detriment of their customers.

hmm lets see what i s better and easier pirate a game by downloading it for free with no install limits and activation or to be bothered by all this registering convince thme you are not a pirate and get trouble or even get baned after you pay for the game, i dont understand who is this fighting piracy mostly its encouranging it hmm games are gonna get sooo pirated the next years and designers will be pawned!thenewau25

Actually, pirated games still come with the install limits and DRM. It's the cracks released for the game that are what let people play it without any form of DRM. Buying the game doesn't restrict you from using a crack if you really want to. There's no one legitimate reason to think "This game has DRM. Too bad, guess I'll have to pirate it now".

Once you uninstall don't you get your install back?wood_duck

In my view, as much as I dislike DRM, I do not think it is up to a game review site to highlight what DRM a particular game contains, or adjust their scores as a result. They should simply review the game on its own merits, and score accordingly.

It is up to the publisher/developer to ensure they 'come clean' about the copy protection/DRM they are using, so that the end user can make an informed decision about purchasing their product. I've said it before, but I think they should really include the logo of the copy protection on the game packaging somewhere, with a clear message if there are limited activations, internet activation, etc. Of course, it would be great to have access to the EULA before making a purchase as well...but I very much doubt that will happen.

Lastly, as much as I hate EA's new DRM, I do have to give them credit for making their intentions public knowledge. They made it clear when Mass Effect PC was released that future PC games would have similar DRM. At least now I can make an informed decision, and choose not to buy any future games published by EA. Other publishers should follow suit and be more open about the DRM measures they intend to use, including the brand of copy protection, as people who have experienced problems with certain copy protection schemes (as I did with SecuROM 7.xx) would then be able to avoid a nasty surprise.

9 out of 10 people may never encounter a problem, but for those who do it is a real pain in the butt trying to deal with it. In my view there should be legislation forcing 'FULL disclosure' in the gaming industry, because right now they are simply abusing their position to the detriment of their customers.

RobertBowen

In my view, as much as I dislike DRM, I do not think it is up to a game review site to highlight what DRM a particular game contains, or adjust their scores as a result. They should simply review the game on its own merits, and score accordingly.

It is up to the publisher/developer to ensure they 'come clean' about the copy protection/DRM they are using, so that the end user can make an informed decision about purchasing their product. I've said it before, but I think they should really include the logo of the copy protection on the game packaging somewhere, with a clear message if there are limited activations, internet activation, etc. Of course, it would be great to have access to the EULA before making a purchase as well...but I very much doubt that will happen.

Lastly, as much as I hate EA's new DRM, I do have to give them credit for making their intentions public knowledge. They made it clear when Mass Effect PC was released that future PC games would have similar DRM. At least now I can make an informed decision, and choose not to buy any future games published by EA. Other publishers should follow suit and be more open about the DRM measures they intend to use, including the brand of copy protection, as people who have experienced problems with certain copy protection schemes (as I did with SecuROM 7.xx) would then be able to avoid a nasty surprise.

9 out of 10 people may never encounter a problem, but for those who do it is a real pain in the butt trying to deal with it. In my view there should be legislation forcing 'FULL disclosure' in the gaming industry, because right now they are simply abusing their position to the detriment of their customers.

RobertBowen

As much as I agree with you that the publisher should inform their customers, I believe it prudent for reviewers to do it if publishers don't. People use reviews as much as any other medium as a tool to decide if they want to purchase a game. Even if it does not affect their opinion of the game, users should be informed.

Well, according to Wikipedia, EA intends to allow users to gain back their "installations" or whatever.

Then again its wikipedia...Personally, i don't know if i am still going to buy this game now, because it just seems like a dirty marketing technique... because if someone wants to pirate something--It will be pirated. thats kind of how it works. I just think this DMR business is ridiciulous corporate b/s.

See, this is why i love stardock games.:P

[QUOTE="wood_duck"]Once you uninstall don't you get your install back?Vilot_Hero

Fair enough, I can see why people would be annoyed. If you got an install back it wouldn't be as bad.

So what happens after 3 cycles of uninstall and install? Kaput?! I hear you get back an install when you uninstall. Is that true?

What if you're having patch fix problems or some bug or virus.. and you have to uninstall, and that happened to be the last install? What then?

And that really sucks for people who reformat their hard drives quite often. So if you want to replay your game again, you simply can't? Grrr..

If it stopped piracy, you might have a point. Sure it might stop it for a week, and thats fine... But once the game has been fully cracked and online, they should patch the DRM out. If they did that I think most wouldn't have much of a problem, except securerom basically acts like malware on your computer...Captain__Tripps

Well, actually it wasn't, cracked before US release yes... And sometimes games do go a week before they are cracked, and for some games it would probably help. For a game like spore that will be on the market for years, I doubt it did anything, and it sold a million copies its first week...

So, with the amount of money we paid, we can only install for 3 times, therefore price divide by 3 equals to final price. DRM huh? We should have an option then, stating how many times we want to install it when we purchase it. Let's see how they think about this idea.

Example:

NON-DRM GAMES

$15.99

DRM GAMES (new! our lowest price yet!)

$5.00 per installation

Order for 5 installations and get a Cheeseburger for free!

Well, actually it wasn't, cracked before US release yes... And sometimes games do go a week before they are cracked, and for some games it would probably help. For a game like spore that will be on the market for years, I doubt it did anything, and it sold a million copies its first week...

Captain__Tripps

So, with the amount of money we paid, we can only install for 3 times, therefore price divide by 3 equals to final price. DRM huh? We should have an option then, stating how many times we want to install it when we purchase it. Let's see how they think about this idea.

Example:

NON-DRM GAMES

$15.99

DRM GAMES (new! our lowest price yet!)

$5.00 per installation

Order for 5 installations and get a Cheeseburger for free!

magdalene2008

[QUOTE="thenewau25"]hmm lets see what i s better and easier pirate a game by downloading it for free with no install limits and activation or to be bothered by all this registering convince thme you are not a pirate and get trouble or even get baned after you pay for the game, i dont understand who is this fighting piracy mostly its encouranging it hmm games are gonna get sooo pirated the next years and designers will be pawned!GodLovesDead

Actually, pirated games still come with the install limits and DRM. It's the cracks released for the game that are what let people play it without any form of DRM. Buying the game doesn't restrict you from using a crack if you really want to. There's no one legitimate reason to think "This game has DRM. Too bad, guess I'll have to pirate it now".

no they crack the game so it gonna say crap and tell you to reinstall it but you can play it without reinstalling there are no install limits the install limit his in after you run the exe not if you try to reinstall it, duh how can they lock the dvd disc? they cant they only lock over internet and crakced releses simple dont connect to internet to play!

[QUOTE="GodLovesDead"]

[QUOTE="thenewau25"]hmm lets see what i s better and easier pirate a game by downloading it for free with no install limits and activation or to be bothered by all this registering convince thme you are not a pirate and get trouble or even get baned after you pay for the game, i dont understand who is this fighting piracy mostly its encouranging it hmm games are gonna get sooo pirated the next years and designers will be pawned!thenewau25

Actually, pirated games still come with the install limits and DRM. It's the cracks released for the game that are what let people play it without any form of DRM. Buying the game doesn't restrict you from using a crack if you really want to. There's no one legitimate reason to think "This game has DRM. Too bad, guess I'll have to pirate it now".

no they crack the game so it gonna say crap and tell you to reinstall it but you can play it without reinstalling there are no install limits the install limit his in after you run the exe not if you try to reinstall it, duh how can they lock the dvd disc? they cant they only lock over internet and crakced releses simple dont connect to internet to play!

Nothing of that which you said resembles a coherent thought. Seriously. Reword it or something.

I tried to reinstall Bioshock the other day to try out my new graphics card, and I couldn't do it. Now I have to contact Securom and get some unlock code. I ended up downloading the demo instead. So yeah, I'm not impressed. But I don't think it's worthwhile for reviewers to mention DRM or have it affect a game's score. A review is supposed to review the game's content, not the process of installing the game (unless there's a serious bug or something).King9999

what he said!

but contact to reinstall is dumb!

The reason the DRM will not work and is conter productive is anyone with minimal knowledge of video game piracy could easily find a hacked copy. The DRM only hurts those who legitimately bought the game and aren't using a hacked copy. I'm baffled that EA actually thinks this will help them.

I saw a really good article concerning this at:

http://news.gotgame.com/spores-drm-debacle-parte-deux/

this is really in-depth and analyzes the problem.

The reason the DRM will not work and is conter productive is anyone with minimal knowledge of video game piracy could easily find a hacked copy. The DRM only hurts those who legitimately bought the game and aren't using a hacked copy. I'm baffled that EA actually thinks this will help them.

I saw a really good article concerning this at:

http://news.gotgame.com/spores-drm-debacle-parte-deux/

this is really in-depth and analyzes the problem.

RCDark16

I'm sure it would say DRM on the case somewhere, and reviewers just want to play the game, instead of talking about DRM.Vilot_Hero

Look for verbiage like "an internet connection required for activation". That's the DRM.

The reason the DRM will not work and is conter productive is anyone with minimal knowledge of video game piracy could easily find a hacked copy. The DRM only hurts those who legitimately bought the game and aren't using a hacked copy. I'm baffled that EA actually thinks this will help them.RCDark16

i think they do realise the game will still get pirated by the people who use torrents or whatever - personally i have a feeling they are aiming more at the people who club together with 5 of their friends to buy 1 copy of the game to share (thereby 4 potential sales being lost) or people who share it amongst their families etc. these sort of people wouldnt nessecarily use torrents or the like, but if they all share 1 legitimate copy sales are still being "lost".

if they really think DRM will stop the proper pirates who have the game up on bittorrent within a week of release then they are truly idiots - and i dont feel a company as successful as EA can be that stupid - so they must have an ulterior motive somewhere along the line and the above is just my guess.

i read an interview with one of the stardock guys the other day and basically his way of thinking is pirates are not "potential customers" because they pirate games, not buy them, and therefore they dont cater for them they cater for people who will actually spend their cash. i think this is an admirable attitude and i want to support stardock for it - i think this is the way forward actually making the customer glad to purchase their product, rather than setting draconian rules that can always be bypassed by someone

PS: I love you.

Okay, now we're done writing letters. Let me just say that I have played Bioshock. Yes that game you all love. Now before you start throwing fruit let me assure you that I had no problems with running or installing that game. I bought it off Ebay too!!

So I have taken a positive spin to DRM and as such I now call it: "Diggidy Robarb Mince". Since PC Gamers have stopped by copies because of the original DRM I along with my business partner, Cliff B, have decided that we are going to make our own brand of Dog Food, comprised entirely of Robarb Mince for your pet so you can game longer without having to get up while you are playing WOW or anything but Unreal Tournament 3. Cliffy insisted on putting his face on the tin insisting that when say that they immediately think of their dogs.....and how well they are going to treat them! Hehe, I had to finish their users!

So next time you're playing wow and send your flat mate out be sure to look for DRM! Cliffy says your pet will love it!! At least more than Unreal Tournament 3......you'd hope so.