Sins publisher Stardock keeps piracy 'in perspective'
by Jason Dobson 
{ Jun 24th 2008 at 10:00PM }
As Stardock CEO Brad Wardell explains it, piracy is an issue that "has to be kept in perspective," and in a recent Big Download interview he further played the common sense card, stating that "the people who actually buy games don't want to be inconvenienced or treated like a criminal." Wardell adds that while Sins "definitely" would have sold more had piracy not been an issue, "everyone who buys games knows they could easily have gone out and stolen it if they wanted to." It's a perspective often trumpeted by the gamer community, but it's even more refreshing to have it come from within the industry itself, and gives us one more reason to keep Sins of a Solar Empire sitting on our desktops.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Rabidkeebler @ Jun 24th 2008 10:23PM
I think that this game was worth picking up. Plus he is right about the "treated like criminals" thing
Josh Warner @ Jun 24th 2008 10:59PM
Agreed. I buy every game I can find that has no copy protection - support it with your wallet, friends.
Oblivion is another prime example, for which I give Bethesda serious props and $50.
For those that have yet to try Sins, it's a great game.
Rabidkeebler @ Jun 24th 2008 10:23PM
I agree with the whole "don't like to be treated like a criminal thing"
NoHitHair @ Jun 25th 2008 2:54PM
I'm bewildered that a CEO could speak so logically and practically.
While I didn't care much for Sins (and I live for great 4X games) I would purchase from them simply to support their company's stance on the piracy issue.
sifer2400 @ Jun 24th 2008 10:27PM
ARG maaatty PIRATES ahoy!!!
Dovi @ Jun 24th 2008 10:45PM
maty?
Alex @ Jun 24th 2008 10:46PM
This post has me pretty interested in this game - it even got an 88 metascore.
With the added cool-factor of no DRM...I will probably have to go check this out.
Sheppy (of the Fidlious Clan of Wong) @ Jun 24th 2008 10:49PM
New name and avatar test... I'm awesome and so is Stardock...
Brian Sexton @ Jun 24th 2008 10:53PM
"One notable exception is Michigan-headquartered Stardock, which refuses to include copy protection in its games . . ."
Are you kidding us with this, Jason? Stardock has the usual key codes. Then if you want updates to their very-buggy games, you have to provide personal information to set up a special account and you have to use their crappy ad-filled application. This includes game-stopping bugs. This may not be DRM, but it certainly has the effect of limiting copies. On top of that, their support e-mail is automatically filtered and frequently REJECTED without any specific explanation of why—just a list of several possibilities. Stardock makes it difficult for even LEGITIMATE copies to be used.
Stardock may make great games (indeed, I very much enjoyed Galactic Civilizations II), but regardless of what Brad Wardell claims to the contrary, Stardock definitely inconveniences is customers and treats us like criminals.
jcmschwa @ Jun 25th 2008 1:30AM
umm, i haven't had that problem at all. you only have to do all that stuff if you want to update the game through the autorun window. and i haven't had a problem with it or thought it was buggy. otherwise you can just hop on over to filefront.com and search "sins of a solar empire" and find all the patch files there. before i went out and bought the game i installed my roommate's copy to try it out. he bought it the day it came out. i updated it just by finding the patches on a filehosting website and obviously i did not register my copy with them and update it their way because it would have been with my roommate's key. also, if their support e-mail is rejected it's something wrong on your end, most likely. not theirs.
check your facts before you go run your mouth off again.
Kevin @ Jun 24th 2008 11:04PM
I kinda feel like going out and buying this game now. Not because I pirated it and feel guilty, but in support of such a stance they have on things.
Now if only they would figure out a way to do away with serial codes so I wouldn't have to bother finding mine and typing the whole thing in each time I install a game on PC.
John @ Jun 25th 2008 1:10PM
You don't have to for stardock games. You register and they have a downloader similar to steam, only without the crappy pop up ads. You log into stardock's app and it will download rigth to your machine, you can throw the disk itself away if you want to and just enter the code off the manual.
Kevin @ Jun 25th 2008 1:16PM
Cool. Thanks for that.
lee @ Jun 24th 2008 11:08PM
really? downloading now!!!!
jk.naw but really if i like the game i buy it. if i dont think ill like im sorry but i just might torrent it. like spore im buying it and very much prepared to lay down the jacksons for it. command and conquer, if i was interested in playing it, ill probably steal it. sorry publishers, but the game better be awesome for me to buy it.
lee @ Jun 24th 2008 11:08PM
really? downloading now!!!!
jk.naw but really if i like the game i buy it. if i dont think ill like im sorry but i just might torrent it. like spore im buying it and very much prepared to lay down the jacksons for it. command and conquer, if i was interested in playing it, ill probably steal it. sorry publishers, but the game better be awesome for me to buy it.
lee @ Jun 24th 2008 11:09PM
woops. dp.
jcmschwa @ Jun 25th 2008 1:31AM
double penetration?
Dale @ Jun 25th 2008 9:55AM
Distressingly promiscuous.
SharpShooter @ Jun 24th 2008 11:26PM
I honestly don't get the point of DRM. It makes life worse for normal people and does nothing to prevent pirating. Every single form of DRM has been cracked so far, and it will continue (Yes, even steam games are cracked and playable).
Scoot @ Jun 24th 2008 11:53PM
You know what i'm gonna go and buy this game even if it is a bit buggy. DRM = Hitler without the hilarity
#28 @ Jun 25th 2008 12:02AM
Fyi, this game, not as fun as the screenshot makes it look. The combat is not at all exciting, even for an RTS. I never got into this game, despite owning it.
juju187 @ Jun 25th 2008 12:17AM
grats stardock
Brian @ Jun 25th 2008 1:43AM
I'd love to see antipiracy measures implemented creatively and deviously. Have the server phone home for activation, but let pirated keys authenticate with caveats. Ramp up the AI, send covert black ops agents at the player via enemy attacks/interception, funnel funds from the player, sabotage installations...
Basically make it possible to play, but a total bitch to keep it up - just like running from a real crime. :P
Limezor @ Jun 25th 2008 2:36AM
I personally don't like the game, so I won't buy it.
But I picked up The Orange Box after trying it at my friends house, which is kind of like somebody pirating a game, liking it enough to play online, and buying it.
michas_pi @ Jun 25th 2008 3:33AM
Epic win for Stardock.
Doctor Nick @ Jun 25th 2008 3:39AM
Stardock's is an excellent example for game publishers to follow. Please support publishers that do not include DRM/copy prevention in their works! DRM is defective by design and restricts your rights to use the products you bought and paid for.
http://defectivebydesign.org for more info.
Brit @ Jun 25th 2008 7:51AM
My perspective as a Game Developer:
As a game developer, I'm very interested in Stardock's strategy. If it works well, it's something my company might like to do in the future (i.e. after the current game I'm working on). It's been interesting to see Stardock's "we don't use DRM" articles cropping up on joystiq, Slashdot, etc. Lately, I think I've seen more articles about Stardocks no-DRM policy than about their actual games. While their no-DRM stance might cost them some piracy, they've managed to turn their no-DRM stance into a lot of free publicity. And, I'd say they saw this trade-off from the very beginning, and chose it intentionally as a marketing strategy. My own suspicion is that they are sending out press releases and emails to journalists everywhere, and it gives Brad Wardell a chance to get in the news more often. The free/drummed-up publicity most likely counteracts the loss to piracy.
Unfortunately, if more game companies take a no-DRM stance, it loses the "free publicity" benefit (because everybody's doing it, the media stops talking about it). Also, the bonus that happens because gamers are going out of their way to support no-DRM companies will likely decline if all game companies are doing it (because gamers will spread-out their dollars among more companies). Nevertheless, (at least for the time-being) with so few companies taking the no-DRM route, it remains a viable method to increase sales. I do hope gamers continue to support companies with a no-DRM strategy. Although, for reasons I pointed out, Stardock's success with a "no-DRM" policy may not apply to the game-industry at large.
Ultimately, DRM makes things harder for everyone: both the legitimate users and the pirates. Sure, DRM is eventually broken, but even a three-month lag time between release and cracked copies is useful because it means anyone who wants a copy during the first few months (when demand is highest) must buy it.
The best case scenario for game developers is if people never engaged in software piracy. This would mean developers wouldn't need to bother with DRM. And the fact of the matter is that we don't want to bother with DRM. It costs time to implement. It costs money. It potentially reduces sales (if people avoid buying because they don't like DRM). And it is one extra hurdle for our legitimate users (and we don't like giving our customers problems)!
In an ideal world of no piracy, legitimate users would have the benefit of never having to deal with DRM because no software company would need to worry about piracy. Unfortunately, game companies feel like they are between a rock and a hard place. Using no DRM could mean a loss of sales, and (believe it or not) most small game companies are not that far away from bankruptcy. Producing even one bad-selling game could mean the end of the company. One game-developer veteran once told me that game development is, on average, a losing industry. (Which isn't the same as saying all game companies are running at a loss; I'm sure Blizzard and EA are quite profitable.) This puts many companies into a hard position where piracy alone can mean the difference between a profit or loss - at a time when the game company's future is questionable.
Some people argue that piracy doesn't actually hurt sales; that people only pirate copies in order to see if they want to buy the game or not. While I'm sure that does happen, it's hard to know the percentages. I certainly don't believe every pirated copy is a lost sale. But, I also don't believe 1,000 pirated copies = zero lost sales. Hopefully, we game companies are putting out good demos to help users get a good feel for whether or not they should buy the game (rather than using pirated copies for that purpose).
Anyway, that's my perspective on things. Hopefully, people won't be too critical of my comment, will be glad to get a game company's perspective, and will understand that DRM isn't some nasty thing companies push onto users because they want to torture them. Rather, it's something that gets used because we're a business. We have bills to pay just like everyone else. Ultimately, it would be nice if DRM disappeared, but I don't see that happening unless piracy becomes uncommon. Quite simply: piracy is a cause, and DRM is an effect. I don't quite know what the perfect solution is. I know what users want (no DRM) - which is, unfortunately, the same thing pirates want. But, piracy turns a portion of our work into unpaid labor, which can undermine a game company's survival. This isn't to say that "game companies must use DRM" is the foregone conclusion - not at all. Like I said at the beginning: I'm interested in seeing how this strategy works out for Stardock. Comments? Suggestions?
By the way, here's my game: http://www.empiresofsteel.com
.
Dale @ Jun 25th 2008 10:04AM
It's clearly the case though that titles often aren't cracked three months after release. Certain titles have been available *before* release, and many copy protection mechanisms are broken within a much shorter timeframe.
I really do feel video game developers should be fairly compensated for their work, and that piracy should be eradicated. However, DRM and copy protection are not eradicating piracy. Far from it. The only people they hinder are the people who buy games, only to find they cannot use them as freely as they would other media they purchase.
Take the recent news about Mass Effect for example. If Mass Effect were an album, I could play it on any of the devices I own unhindered. Stereos, PCs, games systems - any device with a CD drive. If it were a book, I could read it at work, at home, on a beach in Bali or on the bus. Anywhere I wanted. But as it's a video game, I could potentially be forced to play it on a restricted number of systems.
matt @ Jun 25th 2008 9:52AM
Considering how easy it is to get past security protection, I can see companies not wasting the money to protect or try to protect their games. At least until a security protection actually works. They are right, there are 2 types of people in this world, those with moral values and those with aweful parents.
deadrody @ Jun 25th 2008 10:33PM
"I certainly don't believe every pirated copy is a lost sale. But, I also don't believe 1,000 pirated copies = zero lost sales."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Interesting. Unfortunately for the "piracy is ruining gaming" crowd, I think the number is much much closer to 0 than it is to 1000. I also agree that breaking DRM is far easier than game developers would have you believe. The "3 month lag" is an absolute best case scenario when a new form of DRM is released. Once Securom x.z is released and broken, it takes pirates minutes to pirate the second game using that particular DRM software.
I also do not believe that it is any more likely for a DRM free game to be downloaded than a game WITH DRM. All you need is a link to a BT site. There the end user doesn't need to concern themselves with what does or doesn't have DRM. DRM is 100% pointless.
Trevor @ Jun 26th 2008 4:45AM
I'm actually going to buy this game simply because of this forward-thinking attitude. I think it should be encouraged and rewarded. If the game turns out to be enjoyable for me, that's just a bonus.