Blizzard: DRM a 'losing battle' for developers

Ubisoft is the latest company to attach DRM to its PC games in an effort to curb piracy -- an initiative that has had basically the opposite of its intended effect in keeping out people who bought the games. Blizzard's Frank Pearce told VideoGamer that it's not the strategy Blizzard intends to implement in StarCraft II, with the company opting instead for a compelling Battle.net that will make people want to stay online in single-player, rather than requiring it. It's still a form of DRM, requiring online authentication, but it's also meant to serve other, gameplay-enhancing purposes.

"If we've done our job right and implemented Battle.net in a great way," the StarCraft II producer said, "people will want to be connected while they're playing the single player campaign so they can stay connected to their friends on Battle.net and earn the achievements on Battle.net."

Pearce called DRM "a losing battle for us," noting that the group of people who want to crack DRM is always "larger than our development teams." Pearce said "We need our development teams focused on content and cool features, not anti-piracy technology" -- something with which those of us patiently waiting for StarCraft II will agree.

Reader Comments (67)

They're not saying they refuse to use DRM at all. They said they refuse to use DRM in the method that other companies do and to actually give you something for letting them authenticate your copy of the game.

"letting them". You act as if it is optional. You meant to say "in exchange for them requiring you to"

If they require it for single player, then yeah, it would be silly. But requiring it for online is...well...obvious when you consider how they'll be requiring Battle.net, which is on their own servers.

I'm all for battle.net and all that, but it seems very silly of blizzard to say this. it's a distinction, sure, but a distinction without a difference.

I for one think the whole online to authenticate system is just going to become the norm, lets face it, supporting people without internet connections is shortly becoming like supporting people who didn't want to get videocards way back when.

it's just unreasonable to make the game vulnerable to millions of pirates, just so a small fraction of a percentage of players can play without an internet connection.

at this point internet is pretty much a utility like water and power.

This is why Blizzard will always be among the greatest. It's not about making people give you their money. It's about making people WANT to give you their money, to WANT to reward you for your excellent product. This is why those pay-what-you-want from indie developers are so successful. People will feel compelled to reward you for your work if your work is worth it, even with today's rampaging piracy.

It's not DRM you idiot -_-. Just because you want to steal it and have all of it's features+online, doesn't mean it is intrusive DRM.

I'm still sad that they are abandoning the option for people to do multiplayer over LAN.

If there is an offline mode for single player, why can't there be one for multiplayer?

I love some of the "logic" being used by the whiners here. "It's an inconvenience to have to activate the game before I can play!" Well, yeah. It's also an inconvenience to have to drive to the store, maybe stop for gas on the way, wait in line and pay money for the game, drive back home, pull off all the plastic wrap and put the disc in the tray, tell it what directory to install to and then wait for it to finish.

JEEZ, what are these developers thinking? Games should deliver themselves to my house, let themselves in, make me coffee to enjoy while I wait for the installation to finish, and then play themselves so I'm not inconvenienced by having to move or think or actually do anything.

They do get it.

It all goes back to B. F. Skinner's behaviorism studies. Positive reinforcement is stronger than negative reinforcement. When you potty-train a kid, you don't whip 'em for crapping their drawers, you give 'em candy for using the toilet.

Its because of this kind of thought that games like Diablo 2 and Warcraft 3 are *still* fetching $30 at retail. Sure, you could easily get the game for free off a torrent somewhere, but then you can't play online, which means you miss out on half the game experience by not going online. Its marketing genius, and it doesn't require millions of dollars invested into DRM schemes that will ultimately fail.

So many wolves in sheep's clothing posting in here... All this authentication means is that for single player you don't require an internet connection and can play single player with all features sans achievements. For multiplayer, you have to log in to your battlenet account. The DRM here only prevents multiple people from using the same account at the same time (aka ensuring only one person per copy is on). The only legitimate complaint here are the 'people who want to play LAN but don't possess an internet connection' who I suspect are a tiny minority. And the LAN issue has been circulated months and months ago and is old hat.

Are people really upset about needing to be connected to the internet to play? Are there really serious gamers out there who don't have a dedicated internet connection? C'mon, if you're going to get upset about something, find something valid.

In my opinion, while this is GREAT as far as DRM standards go and I DO love Blizzard...

Blizzard is in a league of their own. They don't need the rougher DRM because they have less to protect - They've made solid games for decades, and so their stock as a company within gamer's minds is very high. I buy every Blizzard game almost because it's a given nowadays that it will be awesome... and so does everyone else. Even if you don't play SCII you can make cool stuff with the editor, know what I mean? So even those not in it for SCII will buy it for the new DoTA, etc.

At any rate, this DRM move is the right one, and UBIsoft should listen, but I mean.. it's Blizzard... It's like if a mosquito bit a brontosaurus... would they even notice? They make more money then the country of Columbia (legal exports...) and that's all more or less cashed in monthly. They have the right mentality, but they can also AFFORD to have the right mentality. Companies with heavy DRM are more closer to closing up then Blizzard, so they feel they need to protect their investment more.

Just food for thought.

blizzard can only do this because B.Net and the online experience basically ARE the game (whether it's diablo, starcraft, warcraft). if you're not on B.Net you're missing out on the entire experience.

i can't imagine a COD or BF game possibly implementing a similar method of DRM successfully.

Jayv, than batle.net is drm too. Becauce i need to register fo play.
In my book any drm is bad even the ones that give you good features. I don't want to have a different account for every game i own. I want fhe complete game no reg no cdkey nothing and than they can offer me online stats, highscores, dlc etc.

P.s i pirate and hate drm but also have a 700$ steam library (legal)

Steam is Digital Rights Management. You are required to login to your account to play any of your games on Steam. You are a hypocrite if you say you hate DRM but love Steam.

Also, learn English.

Frank Pearce is to hypocrites as Zack is to Wiki (BFF).

Blah, I say, blah!

I like steam deals, I like the community functions. I don't like to be forced to use them, how is that being hypocrite. And my english is just fine I just make typos

Blizzard: DRM a 'losing battle' for developers

Reader Comments (67)

Posted: May 27th 2010 12:33PM Falcon6 said

Posted: May 27th 2010 1:06PM spin cycle said

Posted: May 27th 2010 8:44PM Falcon6 said

Posted: May 27th 2010 1:04PM xigageshi said

Posted: May 27th 2010 1:14PM Vaitork said

Posted: May 27th 2010 1:39PM DarknessBear said

Posted: May 27th 2010 1:56PM Crusty Magic said

Posted: May 27th 2010 3:55PM sevens said

Posted: May 27th 2010 5:23PM JCDoe said

Posted: May 27th 2010 5:33PM Poifection said

Posted: May 27th 2010 6:13PM Valiscariot said

Posted: May 27th 2010 10:00PM Kingsly said

Posted: May 28th 2010 12:50AM OMMad said

Posted: May 28th 2010 3:20AM context said

Posted: May 28th 2010 2:18PM MrCassian said

Posted: May 28th 2010 2:58PM Its X with Guns said

Posted: May 28th 2010 3:46PM context said

Info

Description

MSRP

Release Date

Genre

Developer

Publisher

Rating

Breaking News

WB conjures up Harry Potter for Kinect this fall

Featured Stories

Silver Lining: I Am Alive's unfeeling world

Game Of Thrones and the paradoxes of adaptation

Super Joystiq Podcast 004: 38 Studios meltdown, Gravity Rush, Civilization 5: Gods & Kings, Dragon's Dogma

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW