9 Feb, 2012
Rumors of the newest Xbox 720 have created quite a stir. There’s been everything from supposedly impressive specs and all sorts of other goodies, but no rumors have sparked as much controversy as a supposed ban on being able to play pre-owned games.
In the latest bid to fight piracy, Microsoft is supposedly implementing the new measure on their new generation of consoles (if it ever happens), which will essentially force players to buy new games if they want any hope of playing it on their Xbox. This sparked outrage with gamers, but developers have had plenty to say about it. The line’s been drawn, and studios have already begun taking their sides.
Design Director to Volition and for Saints Row: The Third, Jameson Durall wrote on Altdevblogaday about how he welcomed this news. Without controlling rampant piracy, Durall believes that this first step will help, and ultimately keep things from going belly up. “Personally I think this would be a fantastic change for our business, and even though the consumers would be up in arms about at first, they will grow to understand why and that it won’t kill them,” he wrote. “In the end, I fully believe that we have to do something about these issues or our industry is going to fall apart.
“People don’t understand the cost that goes into creating these huge experiences that we put on the shelves for only $60. They also don’t seem to realize how much they are hurting us when they buy a used game and how pirating a copy is just plain stealing. Maybe something as simple as educating them could help solve the problem.”
However, Volition seems to be alone in that particular mind frame at this moment in time. The Witcher 2 studio CD Projekt Red is saying quite the opposite, with managing director Adam Badowski speaking in an interview with Eurogamer. The core problem, said Badowski, is a lack of interest in the game itself. It’s not the battle between lawyers, pirates, and the big guns. No, it’s just because people decide to not buy a game.
“It can be a bad thing,” said Badowski bluntly. “We are losing money not because of pirates; we are losing money because people decided not to buy our game. We should invest more power to upgrade and polish our products and convince players to keep our products, to be with us, to understand our needs — because we are an independent developer, we have to prevent lay-offs, we need to grow up and have the power to create new games.”
Where Durall sees a long-term fix for an on-going problem, Badowski sees a short-term fix for a problem that’s going to keep coming back to bite everyone in the ass. This idea of smarter spending of both time and resources into creating a better product sounds like a better plan all-around. Studios make better games, and we get to play them. Not too bad, right?
“Our players – gamers – they make their choices,” said Projekt Red’s Head of Marketing Michał Platkow-Gilewski. “They want to keep with us because they believe our product is worth it, is worth keeping on their shelves, even if they ended the game two or three times already. And they are doing this because they have free will, and if we cancel that, maybe that will be good for business, but if someone forced me to keep the game even if I didn’t want it, it’s against my will.
“We want to do as much as possible for our players, our gamers. We don’t want to force anyone. It’s like we did with DRM-free: we give them freedom and we believe they will stay with us.”
You know that five-lettered word that begins with a T? Spelled something like Trust? That’s CD Projekt Red’s anti-piracy tactic. Released without a DRM first, and then supported with free DLC and a multitude of other goodies, The Witcher 2 definitely sent the message that being a fan of the game will earn you some pretty neat swag. Oh, and that the studio cares about you too.
They’re not the only ones arguing free will either. Joining their corner of the ring is Saber Interactive, the studio behind the upcoming gravity-defying shooter Inversion. CEO Matthew Karch says that gamers shouldn’t be forced to a keep a game they didn’t end up liking. A $60.00 drink coaster? That must be one exquisite drink coaster. Or a game you didn’t like and now can’t sell back because it has little value.
“I don’t think we should prevent people from playing used games. I understand why they would want to do it, but I think the approach should be different,” said Karch in an article for CVG. “As long as games are distributed on physical medium as physical goods, players should have the right to buy and sell them.”
None of us like being told that we can’t do something, and we certainly don’t like being forced to do something. Karch says that to appease everybody, a wholly digital approach would work. He proposed that single player campaigns be separated from the multi-player campaigns, and to sell both components at a reduced price digitally. That way, gamers who wish to have a more fulfilling solo (or co-op) campaign experience can do so, while gamers who love their massive multiplayer jam sessions can have their games too.
“A $60 game has about $30 of waste in it in getting the game to retail. I really believe that with digital distribution you can get that same full-length experience for $30,” said Karch. “With Inversion (or games like Battlefield or Gears), for example, you could break that experience into two components – single-player and multiplayer – and sell them for $15 each or sell them combined for $30. If someone spends $15, then the trade-in value would be minimal anyway even if it were permissible.
“I think that’s the way to go – lower the costs for the same access by bringing them to market digitally. Then a no-used solution is fair.”
The debate continues, round and round. Do used games really hurt the industry? Would such hardware measures really prevent piracy, or would it end up ultimately hurting the very industry that we wish to support and love? Sound off in the comments to let us know how you feel. Better yet, join us on the Forums to tell us.
Recent Comments