LGP Introduces Linux Game Copy Protection

[Aradreth]

This PROVES piracy is KILLING LGP

from private torrent tracked I am not going to tell at lest yeat:

Added on Sunday, Apr 27, 2008
X2 the threat 158 downloads 4 seeds 4 leechers

Added on Sunday, Sep 10, 2006
Postal2-Linux 4261 downloads 7 seeds 1 leechers

Added on Monday, Sep 04, 2006
Majesty Gold Edition 549 downloads 1 seeds 0 leechers

those was LGP games and

Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri for Linux[Eng] (made by Loki)added on same date as
X2 the threat had 268 downloads so that means...

Good bye LGP... damn pirate fools seem to hiding somewhere since there
must be around 11 LPL titles without torrents or pirates are just hiding their
evil doings well or I can't just find them.

and yes it's "nearly" like 25000 people leeching

the 25000 people was for a different game (Assassins Creed).

but lets do it for LGP then shall we?
Majesty Gold was 500 downloads costs $45 shall we say (the price is now just under 40 but it would have been higher eariler in it's life time) that comes to $22500 which for a small company like LGP can mean the difference between failure and success.

X2 250 downloads costs $50 that $12500 and this numbers are just of one private tracker. Public ones tend to get more downloads.

So lets say only $20k was actually lost between those two games, for LGP that's the difference between a "meh" game and something intresting.

[stan.distortion]

http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/site/..._ip01456e.html

A report by a bunch of hippy students in London is going to be biased too, the 12 DL's increasing sales by 0.44 CD's sounds very suspect to me I have found that P2P has changed purchasing though, been stung too many times with crap CD's with one good song that gets played to death and it definately does a lot to promote less well known bands who's music never makes it to the retail chains. Check out 'Punish Your Self' (not to everyones taste but talented), they attribute their entire success to P2P.

[deanjo]

A report by a bunch of hippy students in London is going to be biased too, the 12 DL's increasing sales by 0.44 CD's sounds very suspect to me I have found that P2P has changed purchasing though, been stung too many times with crap CD's with one good song that gets played to death and it definately does a lot to promote less well known bands who's music never makes it to the retail chains. Check out 'Punish Your Self' (not to everyones taste but talented), they attribute their entire success to P2P.

FACT: The music industry has never shown a decrease in revenue to the IRS.

[stan.distortion]

That doesn't prove anything. You have no way of even proving that had those been anything but free that they would have sold them. People don't buy for many reasons which I will not rehash here as they have been pointed out many times.

I'm sorry LGP are keeping track of the figures and can only see the 'doom and gloom' side of them, I don't think many of the DL's equate to lost sales but each and every one that gets played equates to promotion of the name 'LGP' and if LGP can survive the poor sales today they go into tomorrow as a well known company (and if they have made a good impression impression) with a good reputation.
If LGP wanted to really set themselves up for the future (god, I'm gona get toasted for this bit) they would cut there loses on their past titles and give them out for free. Pirating has already ruined any profits so there isn't a whole lot to loose but linux gaming will double overnight and LGP will be right at the top of it and the name on everyones lips.
(off to get the asbestos underware )

[stan.distortion]

FACT: The music industry has never shown a decrease in revenue to the IRS.

Just poking a bit of fun in the name of seeing it from all sides I'm not arguing with the report, quite the opposite and your quote above is all the proof anyone could need

[Max Spain]

Well, this is one looong thread In response to the people whining about Savage 2 and ET:QW's online checks, I just have to say that this is nothing out of the ordinary (afaik.) Savage 2 and ET:QW track their users and guarantee unique online names by having players log in with usernames/passwords. This is not an unreasonable practice or cause for concern. If any of you have not played those games, I would recommend them. Concerning the Penny Arcade game On the Rain-Slick Precipice of Darkenss, the only DRM is an install validation which requires you to authenticate once.

The big problem I see with this LGP thing is that you have to authenticate over and over. This system is NOT well thought out, unnecessary, and should not be applied to a single player game. When/if someone cracks that system, they will completely remove the need to authenticate. In other words, successive authentications will ONLY inconvenience people not using the crack (or fix as I would call it.) LGP should only use an install validation like Greenhouse (distributors of PARSPD) which doesn't inconvenience legit users much (just get online, enter your username/pass, and you're done.) They could also have a validation take place when you update the game.

As for all the people who think DRM is necessary, just look at Stardock's Galactic Civilizations 2 and Sins of a Solar Empire (Windows only ) Those games had NO DRM and had great sales despite that I'm sure they were pirated (they're good games too from what I've seen (galciv) and heard (sins)). Also 1 pirated copy of a game != 1 lost sale. In many cases, I don't think that the people who make some of these games actually play games themselves.

[shiver]

The arguing is mostly pointless as those who think DRM is needed will not change their minds and vice-versa.

One thing I will say is that LGP should realise that a large number of people hold an intense dislike for all forms of DRM. I have a funny feeling that there are a large number of those kind of people using linux. Just a hunch (going on countless threads similar to this one).

With LGP having a fairly "old school" distribution method the only people they are restricting in most cases are their fans. You don't just stumble across a LGP game box in a store. If a pirate doesn't find an LGP title online, I doubt he will go out of his way to order one and wait 2-3weeks (possibly more). Chances are the only reason people hear of LGP titles are due to it being listed on torrent sites.

This is not Windows. Linux is still fairly small compared, especially amongst gamers. Angering a few hundred legitimate customers may not be a good idea as they could be the only ones purchasing your products.

I myself was waiting for the release of X3 and was going to purchase both X2 and X3 at the same time. I won't waste my time... I'll just stick with my legitimate Windows copies. Cheaper and less hassle (they have had their DRM patched out). I will not support DRM in linux, even if I am harming linux gaming in the process...

I only found out about LGP a few years back when reading some random forum about X2. Perhaps the money to produce the DRM could have been better spent doing something about the companies marketing and an upgrade of their '90s looking website.

Good luck to LGP... I fear they will need it.

[FUesir]

I read the first ten or so pages (and then I lost patience)
This is what I think the general trend in this thread has been:

A) Adding copy-protection was a mistake since
A.1) It will soon be cracked anyway
A.2) It mostly screws the honest people
B) However it is understandable given widespread piracy.

So far, I haven't seen anyone doubt that the real fault lies with the pirates. If they just paid, there wouldn't be any problems.

Personally, I view the situation in a completely different light. I don't think the pirates are doing anything wrong given their situation.

People try to equate pirating to stealing, but that doesn't work. If I steal your car, I gain, and you lose (your car is gone). However, if I pirate a game, I gain, and nobody loses! I am not evil just by pirating. I have made nobody unhappy. People realize this intuitively, and that's perhaps why piracy is socially acceptable and so widespread.

Of course, if, in addition to playing the game I also gave the developers some money, that is a socially beneficial act as well, since they can then make more games to benefit us all.

The idea, then, is to motivate your users to give you money, rather than to motivate the ones that aren't yet giving you money to go away. It might be as simple as offering a one-click "DONATE 1$" button inside the game. In any case, stop viewing your users as the enemy, be thankful that they're playing your game instead of your competitor's! Being way too expensive and too obnoxious is a sure way to lose customers.

The real root of the problem, however, lies somewhere else. Most people interpret the situation as a problem of enforcement. If only we could enforce copyright, if only we could come up with some clever unbreakable DRM scheme, then we'd be able to pull in enough money. What, though, is your single biggest cost?

Got $50-75kUS? You probably could get Stardock to allow you access to the code for that. However, keep in mind, that doesn't buy you the right to PUBLISH that work- that's just the money to license the right to port the code. It's probably another $10-15k for a 3k unit run- at the very least. Got a $100k burning in your pocket? You too can publish a game

What, exactly, does (for example) Starduck stand to lose from a Linux port? Why not set a more reasonable price? Hell, if they simply give out the code, fanatics would write them a port for free, and they can build a Linux fan base that might pay off big later on a sequel.

So, it's not the public, from the side of the developers/publishers a lot of silly decisions are getting made.

If you want to FORCE them to make the right decisions, you can try to dramatically weaken copyright (instead of trying to strengthen it or enforcing it better). That would give the proper economic incentives for doing the right thing. Poor incentives -> Poor (from a social viewpoint) decisions. I suggest shortening the term to two years instead of the ninety we have currently.

[niniendowarrior]

I am neither for nor against copy protection. It's just there. I just see it that regardless of what people think or say about it, company head honchos will look for the means of protecting their investment, which for them happens to be that. Whether it does the job or not is a totally different discussion.

[Redeeman]

Fuesir:

I read the first ten or so pages (and then I lost patience)
This is what I think the general trend in this thread has been:

A) Adding copy-protection was a mistake since
A.1) It will soon be cracked anyway
A.2) It mostly screws the honest people
B) However it is understandable given widespread piracy.

So far, I haven't seen anyone doubt that the real fault lies with the pirates. If they just paid, there wouldn't be any problems.

thats not true, even if nobody pirated, they would STILL push for DRM, because they are stupid and doesent realize it does NOT stop anyone from pirating anyway.

DRM is nothing more than a public statement that everyone is practically criminals, and it aint right.