EA: 99.8 percent of gamers don't care about DRM

Viral? Root codes? Give me a break.

99.8%?

Moar liek 8.99% amirite?

Not really. The people who post and write reviews are a tiny minority, so its really hard to say. EA would probably know better as they know how their securom games are selling compared to those that didn't.

Two things:

1. If this were true, EA wouldn't need to say anything about it at all.

2. Also, if this were true, DRM wouldn't exist.

To be more accurate, he's saying 99.8% of the people that actually bought the game don't run into a situation where the activation limits matter or not.Makari

ya, that's wut I was thinking. it's just cleverly worded to fool ppl.

and I rlly think that mudman has it right: there's something wrong about them having to say anything at all if only .2 percent of ppl who buy their games have a problem.

We can all pull figures out of the air, and JR can try and dismiss the backlash against SecuROM if he wants. It's his job to put a positive spin on a bad situation. Personally I think he is being a bit short-sighted, and the current policies of EA are not consumer friendly.

He's probably right that the majority of gamers buying Spore, Mass Effect and other games don't care about the DRM - at least, they don't care now. When the DRM gets in the way of their playing the game in the future (after hardware failures/upgrades, OS reinstalls/upgrades, etc.), then they'll probably start caring and start moaning about it in a year or two.

I don't know about Ring 0 access and all that, but I do view SecuROM 7.xx as malware at best. It was installed on my PC without my knowledge or consent. I blame it for killing a DVD drive (because I was using Nero to back up data when it died, and the drive had worked absolutely fine before I installed a few games using SecuROM 7.xx). When I uninstalled the games, SecuROM 7.xx was not uninstalled - nor was there an option to do so. In fact, it placed null entries in my registry, and a hidden directory on my hard drive that contained files with illegal characters in their file names. It also ran UA7service.exe in the background every time I booted my PC - even when all of the games using SecuROM 7.xx had been uninstalled.

In my view, that fits the definition of a virus. It installs covertly, interferes with the operation of your hardware and/or software, and tries to bury itself in your system so it is hard to remove.

As for DRM preventing piracy, I'm beginning to think he's living in cloud cuckoo land, or he simply chooses to ignore the fact that Mass Effect and Spore have both been pirated to hell and back in spite of them using DRM that was supposed to stop those pirates in their tracks. I don't advocate piracy at all, and wish it was not the big issue that it has obviously become, but at some point common sense should prevail. If the DRM leads to lost sales or problems with your product, and does not prevent piracy, then what is the purpose investing all that time, money and effort into something that is not going to increase your profits?

I have not seen a single shred of evidence from any publisher that DRM has actually increased sales - all I see are posts from developers and publishers complaining about sales lost due to piracy, IN SPITE of all the protections they have put in place. Clearly their current strategy is not working, yet they persist in making it ever more restrictive to the end PC gamer.

Unless DRM is just about killing second-hand sales and casual borrowing. But then I have to ask the question - why is this not an issue for console titles?

After all, the console versions of DRM-protected titles do not seem to carry any of these restrictions. A console gamer can play a game on their console, or on the consoles of as many friends as they like. Without issue. They can rent the game and play it to completion a few times if they wish, without ever buying the game. They can sell it or give it away.

All of those things could be said to lead to lost revenue of console titles as well, and the publisher is not maximising sales potential. So why are these issues not being addressed on consoles - but they are on PC? That is a clear disparity in the market, where one set of customers is being treated differently (and more unfairly) than another set of customers to play the same content.

It's easy to dismiss the real issues out of hand, especially when you don't have any real answers. And that is how I read JR's comments. He does not have any credible answers to the current situation, and blindly keeps playing the piracy card to justify DRM when it is clear DRM has done nothing to stem piracy. That is the height of hypocrisy, and an unsustainable business model.

99.8% of EA's CEO's comments are true and factually based...

wait...

the security level that securerom has access to is a frightening thing, especially since its already a root-kit, its a security issue too.Manyac

i disagree with this incredibly (as it appears im not alone). i know i would personally rather pirate a game (i hope i don't get in trouble for the honesty here) and not have to deal with it installing DRM coding that could mess up my pc. as opposed to buying it legally and having to deal with "hi yeah, your game hosed my system" or waiting on hold for 30 minutes to say "yeah, ive exceeded the max install limit, can i pretty please with sugar on top have a new activation code? since i decided to pay money for the game and put up with its lame DRM instead of pirating it for free and not having to worry about it" i don't know where this guy got his figures from but they really need to think about what they're doing to their loyal paying customers. in the end pirates will find a way to crack a game, most of the time the only thing DRM or securom or anything like that is doing is preventing it from being pirated immediately. i think mass effect it took around 24 or 48 hours to get a crack for those games, people getting games for free don't mind waiting a day or 2.

i have a couple pc gamer friends, none of them will buy a game that they know has DRM or Securom. why risk bricking your PC (or if nothing else your HD) just to play a game. i have a couple who have pirated games just so they wouldn't have to deal with this DRM

i disagree with this incredibly (as it appears im not alone). i know i would personally rather pirate a game (i hope i don't get in trouble for the honesty here) and not have to deal with it installing DRM coding that could mess up my pc. as opposed to buying it legally and having to deal with "hi yeah, your game hosed my system" or waiting on hold for 30 minutes to say "yeah, ive exceeded the max install limit, can i pretty please with sugar on top have a new activation code? since i decided to pay money for the game and put up with its lame DRM instead of pirating it for free and not having to worry about it" i don't know where this guy got his figures from but they really need to think about what they're doing to their loyal paying customers. in the end pirates will find a way to crack a game, most of the time the only thing DRM or securom or anything like that is doing is preventing it from being pirated immediately. i think mass effect it took around 24 or 48 hours to get a crack for those games, people getting games for free don't mind waiting a day or 2. z4twenny

Just an excuse. If you weren't a pirate, you would still buy the game. And then "fix" it after the fact. Sure you shouldn't have to "fix" it, and you probably don't. Thus the DRM excuse for being a pirate.

[QUOTE="z4twenny"]i disagree with this incredibly (as it appears im not alone). i know i would personally rather pirate a game (i hope i don't get in trouble for the honesty here) and not have to deal with it installing DRM coding that could mess up my pc. as opposed to buying it legally and having to deal with "hi yeah, your game hosed my system" or waiting on hold for 30 minutes to say "yeah, ive exceeded the max install limit, can i pretty please with sugar on top have a new activation code? since i decided to pay money for the game and put up with its lame DRM instead of pirating it for free and not having to worry about it" i don't know where this guy got his figures from but they really need to think about what they're doing to their loyal paying customers. in the end pirates will find a way to crack a game, most of the time the only thing DRM or securom or anything like that is doing is preventing it from being pirated immediately. i think mass effect it took around 24 or 48 hours to get a crack for those games, people getting games for free don't mind waiting a day or 2. Captain__Tripps

Just an excuse. If you weren't a pirate, you would still buy the game. And then "fix" it after the fact. Sure you shouldn't have to "fix" it, and you probably don't. Thus the DRM excuse for being a pirate.

DUDES!!! pirates DONT NEED TO USE DRM TO PLAY! why lease em while we can have them forever for free? The question is why we pay games instead of piracy? simple to reward the designers, but in this case we mostly falling victitms of the publichers greed and abuse in a failed effort to stop piracy while that drm is encourage it!

Buying the game and then cracking it sends the wrong message to the publisher. If you buy the game, you are simply telling them you agree with their DRM policy and don't care about it. They don't care if you crack it after the fact, because they still have your money, and still use your sale in their stats to show the number of people who agree with their DRM.

That is waht JR is saying, if you read between the lines. If you buy the game, then you agree with the DRM. It is that simple.

So the obvious solution is not to buy the game at all if you disagree with the DRM. You should also not pirate it either, because by doing so you are just bumping up the torrent figures the publishers use to justify their DRM in the first place.

We can all pull figures out of the air, and JR can try and dismiss the backlash against SecuROM if he wants.RobertBowen

Thats a joke of a statistic. Where did they base their information off of?EXLINK

Pretty much all statistics are a joke. Anybody can make up numbers.

[QUOTE="RobertBowen"]We can all pull figures out of the air, and JR can try and dismiss the backlash against SecuROM if he wants.Makari

But we're talking about relatively new games. Let's give it a year or so, then see if those numbers are still the same.

When EA keeps giving birth to such beautiful stillborn babies (killed by the decision to bundle another infamous SecuROM 7+/LIMITED ACTIVATIONS scheme), one can only ask: WHAT HAVE ITS EXECUTIVES BEEN SMOKING?!

MASS EFFECT could be found in clearance bins not two months following its release; SPORE undersold miserably; EA's stock was hit hard because of these failures (way BEFORE the market dive) - and yet, no one seems to be awake at the helm. DEAD SPACE (and RED ALERT 3 in a week) are proof how little EA respects its own customers (calling "pirates and petulant children" the 3,100 Amazon reviewers that rated the, similarly plagued, SPORE with 1-star was an early hint).

SecuROM 7+ has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH FIGHTING PIRACY. Proof: both MASS EFFECT and SPORE (as with BIOSHOCK last year) were pirated hours within (if not...before) their release - and if I can find this by simply Googling it, so can anyone.... I would bet dollars to donuts that EA is well aware of this - yet keeps bundling SecuROM 7+ although it severely hurts its sales! Ever wonder why?

SecuROM has always been more about data-mining and reporting back to its occasional mothership than...fighting piracy. That is why even FREE demos contain SecuROM. And that is why completely uninstalling a game plagued with SecuROM will NOT remove SecuROM - which will keep playing havoc with your system.

Lately, these security concerns have been accentuated as known Trojans seem to be exploiting SecuROM's backdoor access for their own purposes. In effect, installing a SecuROM-infected game in our computer will be placing your hardware and data at risk long after having uninstalled the game.

The game publishers that utilize SecuROM (such as EA) realize that they are not actually fighting piracy but use it as a pretext to bundle SecuROM with their product WITHOUT THE INFORMED CONSENT of their customers. A snooping-subroutine would require full disclosure but an antipiracy scheme can enjoy some more leeway.

Their near future plans (according to interviews given by their own executives) call for turning our computers into their proprietary consoles where we will be playing games for which we will be paying by the minute.
This nightmarish Pay-per-Play future apparently depends in them first consolidating their technological hold on as many computers as possible. After all, they see us as their cash-cows and they just started herding us in.

I, for one, REFUSE TO PAY FOR ANOTHER RENT-A-GAME.

Tell you what EA, you can keep your defective games and I will keep my hard-earned money. Let's see who has more to loose... amazon_com

To be more accurate, he's saying 99.8% of the people that actually bought the game don't run into a situation where the activation limits matter or not.Makari

Yes.

It should also be factored into the equation that people that buy the game, are aware of the limitations, and don't want to deal with the limitations take necessary steps to avoid encountering those limitations to begin with.

I bought Mass Effect back in May and still have yet to play it (I'll get around to it, back off, sheesh :P). Very much not wanting to deal with their support, I've been waiting for an optimal point in my hardware upgrades to play the game as a way of "saving" my activations as best as possible. Actually, at this point I've reversed course and now believe I should take FULL advantage of activation support though on any game with that model, and I will with ME once I get around to the game ;)

The point is, I'm thinking most people that dread dealing with activations are probably going to find a way to not deal with the activations. In addition, if they are looking at activation stats for a game like Spore, I think it's still way too early to draw a firm conclusion.

[QUOTE="RobertBowen"]We can all pull figures out of the air, and JR can try and dismiss the backlash against SecuROM if he wants.Makari

How do you know he didn't pull numbers out of the air? Do you work for EA? Let's see some hard statistics to back up his commentary, then.

Also, I saw plenty of posts from people who bought Mass Effect and complained about the DRM on the forums, who did not hit the activation limits. Many had technical problems with the game, a percentage of which were due to SecuROM. Even so, you cannot equate a lack of 'technical issues' or asking for support with the game due to DRM, to people who 'have no problem with DRM'. That is simply a misguided notion.

Every gaming website I visit, there are a lot of people complaining about DRM measures in general. So if you buy a game with DRM, it doesn't mean you have 'no problem' with that DRM. You might disagree with DRM in principal, but feel you want to play the game no matter what. This is a very grey area, and comes down to what individuals are willing to accept, even if they are not completely satisfied with the overall situation. You cannot measure that kind of feeling with statistics.

Also, it does not factor in those people who never bought their games because they wanted to avoid the DRM in the first place. There are no solid figures here, in my view, so his 99.8% is questionable at best, and just appears to me as marketing spin to keep the shareholders happy. He's doing his job of damage limitation and downplaying a serious issue so that shares remain bouyant at a time of economic crisis.

Considering the number of people complaining about DRM on the Mass Effect, Spore and Sims forums, I think a lot more than 0.2% of their target market is dissatisfied with their DRM policy.

EDIT:

Finally, I have to view all this from my own experience of running foul of SecuROM 7.xx. I bought quite a few games that used it (without knowing they used it), and then had a bad experience with SecuROM 7.xx on my PC. How can I lay blame for my PC problems with any one game, when it is SecuROM itself that seems to be problematic on my PC? So which gaming forum should I visit, which hotline should I call, in order to complain? I bought and installed F.E.A.R., Call Of Juarez, Bioshock, Boiling Point, S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow Of Chernobyl, Company of Heroes (gold), Hitman: Blood Money, Neverwinter Nights 2, Prey, Project Snowblind, Rogue Trooper, Warhammer 40k expansions - and ALL of them use SecuROM 7.xx.

All of the games ran okay - but still SecuROM adversely affected my PC. So my only recourse was to uninstall all of those games and remove SecuROM. Therefore it was pointless complaining to any individual game developer/publisher as in my view they were all at fault, so I put it down to experience. Yet as a result, I didn't contact any of those publishers for technical support regarding the SecuROM issue - so none of them would count me in any of their statistics. There are probably many gamers experiencing problems on their PC and not realising that SecuROM may be one of the root causes of their issues.

So I don't think anyone in the game industry is getting a complete view from everyone involved.

they should have to advertise the limitations on the back of the box. WATCH THEIR STOCKS FALL!

M- Intense Violence, Drug Use, Partial Nudity, Internet Installs, 2 Limit Installs, Spyware, Malware

you see where im going with this

Who the hell cares about this DRM thing honestly? and if you do, you better have a good reason other than "because other people said it was bad."

It's a way to keep the PC market alive! I mean come on! All of you have pirated a game or something other. Well just so you have it, some people who play PC games strictly download their games. That's sad and sickening.

So what if DRM has "viral-like" coding, it's not like it IS viral. It's there for one purpose and one purpose only.

It is 'dog-eat-dog' when it comes to home entertainment and if EA comes up with a solution for the time being to slow piracy than good for them.

[QUOTE="Makari"][QUOTE="RobertBowen"]We can all pull figures out of the air, and JR can try and dismiss the backlash against SecuROM if he wants.RobertBowen

Also, I saw plenty of posts from people who bought Mass Effect and complained about the DRM on the forums, who did not hit the activation limits. Many had technical problems with the game, a percentage of which were due to SecuROM. Even so, you cannot equate a lack of 'technical issues' or asking for support with the game due to DRM, to people who 'have no problem with DRM'. That is simply a misguided notion.RobertBowen

^ (to CaptainTripps) why pay money for a broken game? why pay good money for something that I the consumer have to fix? sure I COULD buy the game and download the "patch" for the game i bought legally. but the simple fact is that i shouldn't have to. to me a company that does that to my computer, they don't deserve a penny. z4twenny

Well then... Don't buy it, don't download it, don't play it. DRM is just an excuse. What was the piracy reason before copy right protection even existed?

[QUOTE="z4twenny"]^ (to CaptainTripps) why pay money for a broken game? why pay good money for something that I the consumer have to fix? sure I COULD buy the game and download the "patch" for the game i bought legally. but the simple fact is that i shouldn't have to. to me a company that does that to my computer, they don't deserve a penny. Captain__Tripps

Well then... Don't buy it, don't download it, don't play it. DRM is just an excuse. What was the piracy reason before copy right protection even existed?

the blinding obviousness has gone flying miles over your head. i have paid for pc games, i've paid for console games. im simply not against pirating a game, especially when it contains malware and a hacker has kindly removed the malware from it for me.

if i want to play a game and they decide to use horrible DRM why should i choose to let them put their viral coding on my computer. i don't want viruses on my computer period, why in the name of god would i choose to install it freely. why should i have to make a choice "ok either i can play this game and it might screw up my computer or i won't play it and my computer will still be fine" thats not a choice the consumer should have to make. it shouldn't even be a problem. you also seem to miss the point that you're NOT RIGHT. i'm NOT RIGHT. there is no right or wrong, its opinions (and poorly informed misguided ones at best)

i'll continue to pay for and support games i feel deserve it. i'm glad i've "tried before i bought" otherwise i would've spent good money to find out neverwinter nights didn't want to work on my system (i blame it on vista, but that irrelevent, i would've wasted money regardless)

Who the hell cares about this DRM thing honestly? and if you do, you better have a good reason other than "because other people said it was bad."

It's a way to keep the PC market alive! I mean come on! All of you have pirated a game or something other. Well just so you have it, some people who play PC games strictly download their games. That's sad and sickening.

So what if DRM has "viral-like" coding, it's not like it IS viral. It's there for one purpose and one purpose only.

It is 'dog-eat-dog' when it comes to home entertainment and if EA comes up with a solution for the time being to slow piracy than good for them.

xNJN

DRM does nothing to pirates, because they dont have to deal with it. Yet, DRM bothers or, at least, indiffers customers. SO, basically, DRM pisses off customers and do nothing to piracy.

[QUOTE="Captain__Tripps"]

[QUOTE="z4twenny"]^ (to CaptainTripps) why pay money for a broken game? why pay good money for something that I the consumer have to fix? sure I COULD buy the game and download the "patch" for the game i bought legally. but the simple fact is that i shouldn't have to. to me a company that does that to my computer, they don't deserve a penny. z4twenny

Well then... Don't buy it, don't download it, don't play it. DRM is just an excuse. What was the piracy reason before copy right protection even existed?

the blinding obviousness has gone flying miles over your head. i have paid for pc games, i've paid for console games. im simply not against pirating a game, especially when it contains malware and a hacker has kindly removed the malware from it for me.

if i want to play a game and they decide to use horrible DRM why should i choose to let them put their viral coding on my computer. i don't want viruses on my computer period, why in the name of god would i choose to install it freely. why should i have to make a choice "ok either i can play this game and it might screw up my computer or i won't play it and my computer will still be fine" thats not a choice the consumer should have to make. it shouldn't even be a problem. you also seem to miss the point that you're NOT RIGHT. i'm NOT RIGHT. there is no right or wrong, its opinions (and poorly informed misguided ones at best)

i'll continue to pay for and support games i feel deserve it. i'm glad i've "tried before i bought" otherwise i would've spent good money to find out neverwinter nights didn't want to work on my system (i blame it on vista, but that irrelevent, i would've wasted money regardless)

Nothing has gone over my head. You say you don't want "viral" code on your PC. So don't buy games that you think are like this. That doesn't give you the right to go ahead and download them anyway. Sure you can do it anyway, but your contributing to the "problem" of piracy, real or imagined. (from the perspective of the publisher I mean, I think piracy is way overblown)

[QUOTE="z4twenny"][QUOTE="Captain__Tripps"]

[QUOTE="z4twenny"]^ (to CaptainTripps) why pay money for a broken game? why pay good money for something that I the consumer have to fix? sure I COULD buy the game and download the "patch" for the game i bought legally. but the simple fact is that i shouldn't have to. to me a company that does that to my computer, they don't deserve a penny. Captain__Tripps

Well then... Don't buy it, don't download it, don't play it. DRM is just an excuse. What was the piracy reason before copy right protection even existed?

the blinding obviousness has gone flying miles over your head. i have paid for pc games, i've paid for console games. im simply not against pirating a game, especially when it contains malware and a hacker has kindly removed the malware from it for me.

if i want to play a game and they decide to use horrible DRM why should i choose to let them put their viral coding on my computer. i don't want viruses on my computer period, why in the name of god would i choose to install it freely. why should i have to make a choice "ok either i can play this game and it might screw up my computer or i won't play it and my computer will still be fine" thats not a choice the consumer should have to make. it shouldn't even be a problem. you also seem to miss the point that you're NOT RIGHT. i'm NOT RIGHT. there is no right or wrong, its opinions (and poorly informed misguided ones at best)

i'll continue to pay for and support games i feel deserve it. i'm glad i've "tried before i bought" otherwise i would've spent good money to find out neverwinter nights didn't want to work on my system (i blame it on vista, but that irrelevent, i would've wasted money regardless)

Nothing has gone over my head. You say you don't want "viral" code on your PC. So don't buy games that you think are like this. That doesn't give you the right to go ahead and download them anyway. Sure you can do it anyway, but your contributing to the "problem" of piracy, real or imagined. (from the perspective of the publisher I mean, I think piracy is way overblown)

i won't buy the game. i've made that point, as to what rights i do or don't have it seems you feel like you have more authority than myself to determine what my rights are. funny enough, you obviously don't

99.8? Piracy must not be that bad, then!

i won't buy the game. i've made that point, as to what rights i do or don't have it seems you feel like you have more authority than myself to determine what my rights are. funny enough, you obviously don'tz4twenny

EA is well known for distorting things to make themselves look better. Just look at their comments after finally giving up on trying to buyout Take Two. EA had the nerve to say they did the bid to try and boost sales of GTA4 and really weren't interested in actually aquiring Take-Two. Or that is how I understood their comments. I wish they didn't make so many good games, then I wouldn't have to support them :(.Billabong81

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=199371

That was my source of information. The way I interpreted EA's comments was as I said above. I could be wrong though, so forgive me if that is the case.