Counting Rupees: Digital Rights Madness

by Jeff Engel { May 26th 2008 at 8:30PM }

Each week Jeff Engel and Geoff Brooks contribute Counting Rupees, a column on the business behind gaming:

When EA announced that Spore and Mass Effect (PC) would have a DRM program that did performed online verification every 10 days, it generated a massive backlash amongst the gaming community. Many people, who were originally excited about Spore and Mass Effect, now claimed that they would not purchase the games, solely because of the DRM. To be honest, I'm no fan of DRM either. It basically treats all legal customers as potential criminals, and seems futile anyway, as anyone with an internet connection can typically find ways around the DRM. The only people it probably deters are those with little technical savvy and who just want to share a game they bought with their friends and family. The amount of actual sales that would be lost to this is probably pretty limited. With all that said, I'm glad that EA has backed off this new DRM and scaled it back to just an initial online verification. Given the current state of PC gaming as well as the traditionally more "accepted" versions of DRM (like the initial online verification), however, I didn't find this new DRM to be all THAT much worse, particularly with some slight improvements to it, such as allowing a manual verification and extending the timeframe for re-verification slightly (say, to 30-60 days instead of every 10).

The reason for this has a lot to do with what's been going on with PC gaming in the last few years. While the "death" of PC gaming has been talked about for years, it isn't quite here. The landscape is just shifting. While the total NPD sales for each year has been decreasing, other avenues of making money have been developed. For instance, subscription-based games (mostly MMOs, but also games available on GameTap), cheaper more casual downloadable games (eg, PopCap Games), and even free, ad- or feature-driven games (eg, Dungeon Runners, Battlefield Heroes, Quake Zero) make up an ever increasing portion of PC-based revenue. Thus, the actual retail sales are taken up mostly by a few casual games, MMO starter kits or expansions, and maybe the occasional shooter or RTS game. Take, for example, the most recent NPD PC numbers for the week of May 4-10:

1. The Sims 2 Kitchen & Bath Interior Design Stuff
2. The Sims 2 Double Deluxe
3. World Of Warcraft: Battle Chest
4. The Sims 2: FreeTime
5. World Of Warcraft: Burning Crusade
6. Call Of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
7. World Of Warcraft
8. Sins Of A Solar Empire
9. Hoyle Card Games 2008
10. Warcraft III Battle Chest

Seven of the top ten games on the list could probably be classified as either "casual" or as an MMO. The other thre games include an FPS that's also available on consoles (and sold far more on them), an old RTS associated with the extremely popular World of Warcraft, and a new, positively reviewed RTS. While FPS and RTS games will probably always maintain some popularity on the PC, particularly when hugely popular developers like Valve and Blizzard continue to make them, the MMOs and casual games have begun to dominate the PC arena. Outside of The Sims, which will continue to do well (and basically uses several retail expansion packs as its "subscription" model), it seems like most PC gaming requires some kind of online component now. That's not to say that every game has some sort of multiplayer component to it, but playing an MMO, browsing over to Desktop Tower Defense, or maybe just downloading the latest game from PopCap Games, all require internet connections.

Which is why, when I saw the newest DRM-scheme, it didn't seem like such a massive extra burden to me. When a publisher's game doesn't have a centralized multiplayer component that could help prevent piracy (like an MMO), it's bound to try and find a scheme that reduces it as much as possible. In an ever-increasingly online, connected world that can support 10 million WoW players (as well as players of other MMOs), it probably just seemed like it made sense to use that online component to try and keep people honest for their own more single-player oriented games. Sure, there is going to be a subset of people that probably couldn't play the game without a hassle, but for the seeming majority of the current PC gaming public, it probably wouldn't be that much bigger of a deal than, say, Steam having to register and unlock my retail copy of The Orange Box. That being said, the less obtrusive and more transparent DRM is to the end user, the happier I'll be.

As co-editors of A Link To The Future, Geoff and Jeff like to discuss, among many other topics, the business aspects of gaming. Game companies often make decisions that on their face appear baffling, or even infuriating, to many gamers. Yet when you think hard about them from the company's perspective, many other decisions are eminently sensible, or at least appeared to be so based on the conditions at the time those choices were made. Our goal with this column is to start a conversation about just those topics. While neither Geoff nor Jeff are employed in the game industry, they do have professional backgrounds that are relevant to the discussion. More to the point, they don't claim to have all the answers -- but this is a conversation worth having. You can reach them at

Tags: Counting-Rupees, DRM, joystiqfeatures, Mass-Effect, Spore

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Deck @ May 26th 2008 8:58PM

Good read and good article.

The issue for me isn't having to connect to the internet to validate, I am on every day for numerous hours. I think its the whole principal of the whole thing, which I believe you got it.

As you ended it, I don't think people are opposed to DRM in a broad sense, we just want it transparent and not to hinder our ability to play a game as quickly as possible. (I mean more loading times due to validation and so forth all the time).

And plus the thing is, in the end, the pirates will get around it. There's no doubt about it. They just need to do what Sins did and go DRM free. Sure pirates will do their work easily and there will be copies to download illegally readily available but...look at how well it sold? Especially being a no-name game beforehand for a lot of people.

BananaBoat @ May 26th 2008 10:20PM

Right. This type of DRM is basically them trying to tell us what we can do with our computers, and when. I for one will never stand for it. Game devs and publishers are starting to figure out that their schemes are backfiring, and hopefully they won't try anything like this in the future.

What am I saying, they'll try it again...and again...and again......Good Grief

Tykin @ May 27th 2008 11:47AM

I've noticed most journalists don't seem to mind the 10-day authentication system. However, what most of them forget or do not realize is that some of us do not have a constant connection online.

While I am at college, I do not connect my PC to the internet (I am surrounded by computer labs and I find the internet a distraction, so I opt to not pay for it). So, you're telling me that even though I bought the game legitimately and even though it's only single-player, I can't play it due to my lack of connection? That's BS.

t_m @ May 27th 2008 9:11PM

though INTERNET CONNECTION is listed on the box as a requirement? So I'm not sure you have many grounds for complaint.

Sean @ May 26th 2008 8:59PM

Just because the top ten games are all casual or mmos doesn't mean pc gaming isn't dead.

In 2007, PC gaming brought in $910 million. To compare, console games were $6.6 billion, portable games were $2.0 billion.

That means if I know 100 gamers, only 14 of them are PC gamers.

Slayer @ May 26th 2008 9:03PM

Everyone has been saying that pc gaming is dying for years now. I'm not going to buy into that bullshit.

Benny @ May 26th 2008 9:09PM

It will never 'die', however PC gaming is falling in rank. The greater profitability developers seem to be enjoying on consoles is only accelerating the process.

Nick the Hero of Canton @ May 26th 2008 9:14PM

In comparison, yeah. But there aren't a huge amount of PC games being made now. 900 million? Fucking amazing, right there.

Haggard @ May 26th 2008 9:17PM

Viva la PC!

Jeff Engel @ May 26th 2008 9:32PM

Does that number account for the 10M active subscribers to World of Warcraft, which would bring in something like $150M in revenue per month? That would seem impossible, as multiplying that out for a whole year would make that $1.8 BILLION, double what you're claiming for all PC gaming.

And this doesn't include all the other subscription based games out there, nor does it likely contain downloadable games or games that make money from ad-revenue, if you're just using NPD numbers. My guess is if you add in all the numbers, PC gaming starts looking more respectable again.

PC Gaming isn't dead... it's audience has just changed. Many of the original PC gamers have moved on to consoles as millions of other PC players play games like WoW and Peggle. Sims is, perhaps, the exception... a game with no online component at all that continues to sell tremendously well, but it's still hitting that "casual" sweet-spot on the PC, it seems.

Haggard @ May 26th 2008 9:51PM

@Jeff
It's often the case that downloaded game sales aren't taken into account in NPDs and the like - based on your WoW calculation I'd be willing to bet it's just boxed retail sales.

And the problem with that for the PC is a huge number of hardcore PC gamers (a couple of million at least) buy games like Counter Strike, CoD4, BioShock and the Orange Box through Steam, with online transactions and downloads.

I also wonder if the sales data takes online retailers like amazon and play.com into account. Nearly all new PC games come out at £25 on Amazon but are like £35 in the shops, whilst on consoles, both Amazon and shops hover around £40.

So not only are more PC gamers buying from amazon etc than console gamers, but they're only paying just over half as much! (lowering the total income)

Purple Haze @ May 26th 2008 11:00PM

Jeff Engel pretty much said what I was going to say, the only point I'll add to that is that the PC is only 1 platform vs 4 major home consoles (I still include the PS 2). Also, Sean, you don't point out whether that is just software sales or hardware as well, if it includes hardware sales then the argument died as soon as you posted the comment, not that it didn't anyway.

Matt @ May 26th 2008 11:24PM

See there are 2 problems with these numbers..

#1: PC gaming is one platform, console gaming is composed of multiple platforms, as are portable gaming. Saying "PC gaming made X while console gaming made Y" is like saying "The PS3 made X while the XB360 and Wii put together made Y".

#2: Price points for PC games are cheaper than console games. XB360 and PS3 games are $60/each. PC games are $40-50, with a lot of games being even cheaper than that.

GreyFox @ May 27th 2008 1:44AM

He isn't saying it was dieing he is just saying the retail sales are dominated by more casual gamers now that the hardcore have moved onto Steam. Just look at Valve as a clear example of PC gaming thriving because not only are they swimming in cash but all their releases sell much better on PC then console.

"the less obtrusive and more transparent DRM is to the end user, the happier I'll be."
I couldn't agree more. The less I'm presumed guilty before innocent the happier I'll be.

Benny @ May 26th 2008 9:19PM

It's true that people overly freak out when they see 'DRM'; most of the time it's not going to cause them grief whatsoever.

I may never want to use my iTunes songs on a non-Apple player. I may never need to play Mass Effect when I'm not going to have an internet connection. But I like to know that if need be, I could. It's the potential for DRM to interfere in my enjoyment of products that turns me against it, not any actual issues.

The problem with us humans is that we're inherently pessimistic, and so we take into account anything that could possibly go wrong when making a cost-benefit analysis. Which actually, some may argue isn't a problem at all. One day we will get a fair, transparent form of DRM and complaints will continue until it arrives. Those fancy-pants chips that were shown off the other day are a step in the right direction.

BigD145 @ May 26th 2008 9:34PM

What happens when EA goes under or if it even falls on hard times and has to cut down the verification server? You might as well burn your money now.

Before I'm asked, yes I do still play games that are over 10 years old.

DRM may seem minor now, but if you've watched it it's only getting worse and worse. Once EA and others saw that they could get away with a little bit, they set a precedent that will not stop unless the consumer votes with their money. Eventually things will get so bad that you'll have to vote with your citizenship. DRM is guaranteed to turn into a nasty law in the coming years. It's probably already written and is just waiting for the best combination of Congressman to see it passed. It's been done before, it'll be done again.

Jeff Engel @ May 26th 2008 9:37PM

There are actually a couple relevant cases to this as some online companies that sold downloadable games went-under and left their customers without a way to play the games that they legally bought.

I don't have the specific case in front of me, but I do remember that at least one of these companies provided a full unlock code/patch to their customers after they went under. If EA went under, hopefully they would do something similar.

That said, EA isn't going anywhere for awhile.

Slayer @ May 26th 2008 9:39PM

I've always though about that. It's kind of like buying games off of steam. What would happen if steam went down permanently? Like you, I still play old video games.

BigD145 @ May 27th 2008 2:09AM

Steam has been cracked at least half a dozen different ways to play offline. I can only hope the EA system will be cracked as efficiently, because they will not do it themselves if/when they go under. Their rep is bad enough right now that it's likely when the corporate entity does kick the bucket, the core people will make a new name and new corporation in direct competition with their old and dead self. It's been done before and the majority of consumers will never notice. It's sickening and it's 'just business.'

Rurik @ May 26th 2008 9:35PM

My biggest issue is companies "allowing" me to play a game I've purchased. What happens when they no longer allow you? What happens in 10 years from now, when you want to replay Mass Effect, just as you would an old story? Will the activation servers still be online? Will the company really release a patch to remove activation at that time? Will the company goes out of business and screw over all of their customers?

All these questions are raised with DRM like this.

Ihar `Philips` Filipau @ May 27th 2008 5:28AM

+100

AwesomeTown @ May 27th 2008 7:54AM

That's the one thing I'm worried about. I have tons of computer games from 10+ years ago. I would be so pissed if I had to throw those old classics out. Imagine.. Oh, Day of the Tentacle? Sorry Hoagie, you are trash now. Fallout? Nope, no more. System Shock 2, well, you're only 9 years old. Might as well put you out of your misery and throw you out now.

No I can't think about it anymore, it's too awful.

I really want Mass Effect, I love BioWare and I waited for the PC version. But the only way I'll get it now is the 360 version. Sad.

t_m @ May 27th 2008 9:13PM

Or not raised.

Considering that Bioware said they'd release a patch to remove authentication when they turned off the authentication servers.

Deadpool @ May 26th 2008 9:48PM

8. Sins of a Solar Empire

This game made a ton of money and shipped with no DRM whatsoever.

I don't have to phone home to Stardock every 10 days I want to play it, and I can install it on as many systems as I want without ending up with a $50 coaster. While EA backed down from the phoning home, the limit of 3 installs for Spore and Mass Effect PC is too much hassle to want to even think about putting up with.

I took the money I was going to spend on Mass Effect and put it towards the Fallout, Baulder's Gate, and Icewind Dale compilations and have no regrets and no problems installing and playing the games. I doubt I'll be able to say the same thing about Mass Effect when it's as old as these classics.

Arttemis @ May 26th 2008 9:58PM

I completely agree, and furthermore, the fact that it's selling so well should be proof that these ridiculous DRM schemes are required to fight piracy. I was genuinely shocked at the amount of people defending and supporting the validation system in other threads; apparently people no longer understand that consumer's have rights and businesses should have ethics.

I haven't yet played SoaSE, but I've heard great things. Normally I'd pass on this genre, but I plan on picking up a copy of this game specifically to support their level-headed stance. More power to them.

Arttemis @ May 26th 2008 9:59PM

Typo: "the fact that it's selling so well should be proof that these ridiculous DRM schemes are *NOT* required to fight piracy."

John @ May 27th 2008 4:51AM

I actually bought Galactic Civ 2 for the same reason, it wasn't a game I'd usually play, and I loved it.

I'll be getting the expansions and Sins as soon as I get some play money.

Ihar `Philips` Filipau @ May 27th 2008 6:09AM

@Arttemis:
"[...] the fact that it's selling so well should be proof that these ridiculous DRM schemes are required to fight piracy."

To be perfectly honest, StarDock really nailed the game download/installation service.

It just works: no bells, no whistles - just your games, waiting there for you.

In some time, the GalCivII:TotA was best spent gaming money.

gamerprophet @ May 26th 2008 10:13PM

I give PC gaming 20 years at best, then it will be for all intensive purposes dead.

Paxtez @ May 27th 2008 12:07AM

Just FYI the phrase is "intents and purposes" (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_the_saying_%27all_intents_and_purposes%27_or_%27all_intense_purposes%27)

I did the same the for years, until I saw it on Grandia 2, who says video games never teach you anything. =)

LaughingTarget @ May 27th 2008 12:01AM

I give the console that amount of time. If you look at it, consoles are becoming more and more like desktop PCs. They are getting Internet browsers, printer hookups, full blown operating systems. The PS3 has many manditory install games and the PSP has software that doesn't work on all models, prompting an upgrade (ie Skype).

Consoles are dying and are turning into brand-name PCs that have no interconnectivity. Pretty primitive as even a Mac and a PC can hook up and talk.

Ihar `Philips` Filipau @ May 27th 2008 6:18AM

To PCs gaming was always optional. People do game on PCs because they have the PCs and because they want to game.

Game development on PCs started not as business - it started as hobby. Hobbies are dying with people - they do not depend on business to survive, they depend solely on people who are doing it.

IOW, your point is moot. Extrapolating console business practices to PC market is silly.

johnnyprozac @ May 26th 2008 10:58PM

I really think we have to stop using NPD as a yardstick for any meaningful data in the PC space because the business models have so significantly changed. I would argue that NPD data does not reflect 40 to 50% of the entire PC games market. It fails even worse when we look at the total global market.

The total global market show actual increasing pc games sales in emerging markets who ironically are increasingly getting better network infrastructure and better telco business models than the horrible US network which then reflects in the increasing number of online sales elsewhere in the world.

I would argue that even if NPD had a global presence they would still be useless because most emerging markets have game sales online rather than in packaged form. From Brazil, Venezuela, Ecuador and the South American markets to China, Korea, Vietnam, Thailand, China, and the Japanese markets; more games are being sold and operated online than through retail packaging.

Worldwide, I would argue that the PC is growing and thriving faster than consoles because the expenditure is more easily justified and the platform much more prevalent. With the online infrastructure more robust as well, pc sales are doing better outside of the US.

I think its lazy of journalists, new sites, and these "professional" commentators to keep using what is clearly an outdated and narrow data source.

Joe H @ May 27th 2008 1:07AM

I've said this a few times, but EA really needs to bring their PC games to Steam, because its the only way I buy games anymore.

Thefremen @ May 27th 2008 3:35AM

I know personally, my objection isn't with connecting to the internets, but connecting to the internets with EA and Securom. I recently purchased DOW: Platinum, and after the verifcation routine contacted securom's servers it didn't authenticate the program and allow it to work. Checking the FAQs on THQ and D2D it was recommended that I contacted Securom. After going through their process, which involves running the program with a logging thing then emailing the results to their customer care. After a few days they stated "not my problem lol" (in so many words) and to contact THQ. So after the initial "run windows without any services" email I have yet to hear more advice from them, but to summarize I haven't been able to play the game after 2 weeks of owning it and doing everything in my power to use it.

I own Dawn of War:Soulstorm which does not do online authentication and uses a different version of Securom. That game runs just dandy. As a friend of mine said "Securom will never help paying customers who can't run their games because of their crappy DRM. This is because they worship the god Seku'Rom and they consider Him to be infalliable". I can assure you that with the huge sales of these games, EA's servers would constantly crash and given their record on patching games (see: battlefield series) they would do nothing to help customers in 5 years when they abandon the verification servers.

yh @ May 27th 2008 5:29AM

The system of DRM is not the issue. It could be just a CD check or an elaborate online scan, but the issue here is that DRM is not going to help the sale of the game, nor will it curb the game from being pirated. The time and money spent on the DRM scheme could be much better spent on last minute polish for the game, which would probably garner much more support and thus gain more sales. Hell, put that money toward advertising, as even that has a more positive effect on sales than restricting an already paying customer's use of the game.
While I would like to say I'm 100% anti-DRM, there are very few cases where its acceptable, that is if the mode of DRM means the customer gains a large tangible benefit, such as Valve's Steam. If every DRM system happened to come with autopatching, anywhere gaming (a HUGE benefit for those who misplace CDs often), and a built in community system then I think people might not think of DRM in such bleak terms.
In the end, this is definitely beating a dead horse, as everyone knows people are willing to pay if they feel they're getting something worthwhile (such as the Orange Box), and thus putting restrictions on those very people who would be customers without giving them an even greater benefit means you might have just lost a return customer for the next game.

Thranx @ May 27th 2008 9:13AM

Developers/Publishers have a right to control how their licensed material is disseminated.

The "DRM Fiasco" that EA got itself into is another example of having to cater to the vocal minority. How many of you really don't have a net connection? Really? I think EA could stand to lose your business. Gaming is an internet connected world. The model presented by Valve/Steam will continue to be a popular one because it creates a realiable system for the maintenence of games. As much as we're used to it, we don't like going to add infested websites to download the patch for our favorite game.

Gamers (yes, PC Gamers) see systems like XBox Live and say "I want that" to single click access to their game every time. No hassle, no fuss, no going elsewhere for their security/bug/content updates. Publishers want it because it's a venue that they control.

I have no problem, with the 10 day authentication. It will happen eventually, people will whine and then they'll get over it, just like they have reguarding everything on Steam.

Of course, a responsible system wouldn't have all it's servers in a single city (say Bellevue, WA?) where it would be vulnerable to an extended power outage. :P I would certainly need to be a distributed network. :)

Warlock @ May 27th 2008 11:51AM

The problem is not specifically that you don't have a net connection. But what if your internet goes down on one of the re-authentication days? What if you are playing on a laptop and don't have an active connection at the time? There are a lot of reasons why you might not be able to authenticate your game. I really don't want to be punished for playing a SINGLE PLAYER game and losing my internet connection.

Also, as others mentioned, EA will not run the authentication servers forever. Just as an example, I believe Sony has already turned off all of the servers for its online PS2 games. And that's maybe 6 years, if that.

Darkbhudda @ May 27th 2008 10:38AM

I had one of the copy protection schemes prevent me from playing a game I had purchased due to buggy software. Now I just buy the console version if it's on PC and consoles. Less hassle.

Add to that I have files I have legally purchased which won't authenticate because the software used has changed and is NOT backward compatible for DRM. You have to download new versions of the files, not all of which are available. So I would have been better off pirating the files in the first place.

DRM can get stuffed.

zeh @ May 27th 2008 11:09AM

Just try and play a DRM game in linux through wine, I dare you.

t_m @ May 27th 2008 9:46PM

Few points:

1 - PC sales have been going up year on year, not down. NPD sales haven't been going up as fast as consoles, but they've still risen. And NPD sales don't take into account the majority of purchases these days. (MMOs, Steam, Popcap, etc..)

2 - How come no-one ever pirates Sims games?

3 - Legally, the license you obtain games under prevents you from copying, running multiple installs, etc.. so the DRM doesn't actually "prevent me from using my legally purchased game". Unless the DRM goes wrong of course...

4 - The fact DRM doesn't stop a game being pirated is irrelevant - I wish people would stop bringing it up. What publishers want to achieve is simply to delay the piracy long enough to sell titles in the launch period. THey'll sell 90% of their games in the first few weeks, so a DRM system that delays piracy for 20 days will save them a lot of money. After a month or so they probably don't care about piracy.

5 - In the bioware case an INTERNET CONNECTION was clearly labeled a a requirement on the box.

5 - The Bioware fuss was totally overblown by the (two-faced?) gaming media. This DRM was essentially an IMPROVED version of the DRM thats been used for years (every bioware game since Baldur's gate 2 i think).. and most of the improvements were to aid the CONSUMER.
(no dvd required. loose online checking period, etc..)
Almost all the complaints were ill-informed and had already been addressed by bioware before it got hyped on blogs like joystiq.

6 - At some point we have to ask the question, if DRM is totally transparent and has no effect on the end user, are we still opposed to it on some form of moral grounds?
I think we've been conditioned to be up in arms about any new DRM because of so many instanced where its penalised the legitimate consumer. But in cases like Bioware and Steam it seems like it doesn't penalise the user... so why are we still up in arms?
(NB, I'd rate iTunes DRM as far worse, as it restricts you to only apple brand products).

7. Console games have just a much DRM, but people aren't up in arms about them.

8. Either way, every platform will be on a Always-Connected, Always-on, Download-Only, Walled-garden system within a year or two anyway. Days of buying discs are gone...

9. Just had to call my bank for the 3rd time this year to reset my password because somewhere in the 4 numbers and 1 passowrd I have to enter EVERY time I log into my bank account I made a mistake and locked myself out. Talk about protection that only hinders legitimate users!!