The Top 10 Game Industry Disasters of 2013

10. Online DRM

It is not clear just exactly when Digital Rights Management became a dirty phrase for gamers -- probably the first time that a publisher imposed draconian restrictions on a game using what we will call, for lack of a better phrase, creative DRM restrictions?

The problem with DRM is not that it was created to prevent games from being pirated -- hell any gamer who is not invested in stealing games will admit that successful anti-piracy helps keep games profitable, keeps the industry healthy, and that directly translates into more titles and better games for the gamers to play.

The problem is that it seems that many publishers are out of touch with what gamers want in terms of access and convenience. The same cannot be said for gamers and their understanding of what the game publishers (and by extension game studios) want:

They want to kill the used and previously-owned secondary games market.

They want an iron-fist method to verify required licensing and 'ownership' -- that word is in quotes because of one of the most fragrant effects of DRM: the re-interpretation of what game ownership means. Thanks to DRM gamers no longer purchase games, they purchase the right to play a game via the limited license they pay for. The actual game media still belongs to the publisher under the modern interpretation.

Thanks to creative use of serial number based aspects of DRM game publishers like EA have enjoyed limited success in dealing with the secondary used game market by requiring codes to register a game. One-time-use codes, so if you purchase a game used, or rent it from a company like GameFly, depending on which game it is you either get a crippled game (usually single-player mode only as online requires the registration code) or it is non-functional.

Experiments with DRM that require the gamer to be online at all times in order to play a title -- one of the more visible examples of that in 2013 was SimCity 5 -- a DRM approach that has garnered massive hostility from gamers -- but not for the reasons you are probably thinking.

Since most gamers already prefer and maintain an active net connection while playing on their console, requiring it is not really that big a deal -- for most gamers. The problem is that there is an entire class of gamers who that requirement basically screws: active duty deployed military gamers -- and screwing them is not an action that the games community will tolerate.

Speaking from personal experience -- I took my PS2 and GameCube to war with me -- I cannot even begin to explain how important gaming was as an outlet, as recreation, and as a way to stay sane. It was all that and more, and if that sort of DRM had been in use?

The thoughtlessness of the decision to require online connectivity as an element of DRM fully illustrates just how out-of-touch the game publishers are. Because while nobody wants war -- and that especially includes the soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines who are actively participating in the process -- we honor those who stand ready to defend us, and we don't screw them for no good reason. Just saying.

Posted: 14th Mar 2014 by CMBF
Tags:
2013 video game disasters