Taylor: "Secure PC Gaming Is the Future"

I had to laugh when he mentioned lower price point. Since when has ANYTHING ever gone down in price? That'll never happen. Maybe if we hit a critical mass for the idea of direct to consumer distribution, a lot of the traditional costs of marketing games will go away and more money goes to the developer. I'm all for that. I say give the developers more control over how their games are marketed and distributed. Its their product.

As for secure gaming, I think the idea of "leasing games" might be fine for a casual gamer, but the true hardcore players wont go for it. And, despite the fact that broadband penetration still continues to creep up, the reality is that quite a few gamers still have slow or inconsistent access to the internet. We are already so dependent on the web that God forbid your web connection go down right? Its hard to imagine a day where your access or ability to play games would be absolutely dictated by the reliability of your net connection. I can just imagine sitting down for a long evening of gaming only to discover your broadband is kaput. I would hurl my PC across the room.

If I buy a game I should OWN it. Every byte of it. And I should be able to put it where I want, when I want and not have to rely on a network for "permission". I hated Steam when it came out, I tolerate it now but the idea of all gaming experiences requiring a network connection is just too big brother-ish for me and I suspect for many other gamers.

Plus, wouldnt that completely kill (or atleast limit) the mod communities too? I mean, if you have no local copy of the game code to modify, how do you "get under the hood."?? Some of the most popular games of all time have started as mods (CS).

There are games that are good and there are games that come out badly. It's the same with copy protection. Steam works, lasts, and has decent support. Steam is the HL2 of copy protection where StarForce is Superman64.

They're going to protect their game in one way or another. I buy through Steam because my DVD drive won't read games on non-standard discs. I buy through Steam because I've physically lost Diablo 2 about 3 times now. If they give you extra services like steamworks will and stay out of your hair with the protection, then there's no reason to complain.

I think it needs to involve some sort of wheel with a code on it. This device would be impossible to replicate (possibly made from some sort of space-aged fabric employed on so many NASA space missions), and would ensure that the game could not be played without it. And uh, I dunno build the game around a security system instead of adding one?

OK, its time to clear this up. These guys don't know what they are talking about. Its not piracy thats the problem. Its games like World of Warcraft, Sims, online games. Games that you can play for months to years on end. A single game that eats up your time and keeps you from buying anymore games. Those games are the problem. I've been saying it for years and now theres a dev who backs me and is not pointing his finger at pirates. Peter Molyneux says it here, http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=33298

So there are tons of pc gamers they are just busy playing and not buying. Want your game to sell. Make it great fun and unique and stop taking the easy route out by blaming pirates.

"PC gaming isn't dead. PC gaming—the old model— probably is," Taylor told GamesIndustry at GDC. "Secure PC gaming is the future—it's going to thrive and we've all got to get on that,"

this guy an idiot or what?

its ppl who work for said companies that leak shit out, get rid of them first, dont gimme this secure crap

what happens though when the company goes out of business and you cant connect to the server to authenticate and play your game anymore? i mean look at all the old games that are still fun by devs that have since been disbanded/etc... (unless they release an "unlock patch" or something in that event, but not everyone will bother to do that)

Hahahaha DRM hahaahah

More than five thousand years of civilization and we still can't stop people from stealing physical items, let alone abstract information. Give it up, security invulnerability is mathematically impossible, and obscurity by obfuscation can only go so far. Intrusiveness works against the wishes of the customer, and server-based games represent a sliver of potential game pitches.

Just go make good games and sell them over digital distribution channels. My currency is worth less than three times what a dollar is, yet I seem to buy a game a month through Steam.

three-d and everyone else with the same opinion. If PC gaming is to survive and move ahead in the future with exclusive AAA games and such things must and will change. Like it or not if things continue, in a year or less we will all be using a console for the latest and greatest games. This would suck as consoles being hardware limited would leave game technology development stuck in the past. WE NEED pc gaming to move forward and untill piracy is dealt with it's not happening like it has in the past. Except for Crysis most of us are using hardware (8800 series) that could be used to play games far more realistic than the console ports like COD4 ect...

I'm not saying that this form of piracy protection will work for the masses, but something like Steam would be fine with me. I could care less about playing old discontinued games, it's like trying to watch old black and white movies. I BUY all my games and so should everyone else.

It's impressive how little these guys understand about the nature of piracy. It's their job, their industry, you'd expect them to have reflected on these matters and have a better understanding of who uses pirated games and why..

It feels sad to say it, but PC gaming is dying. Its not just piracy, it might not be piracy at all: I just bought a mobo,cpu,psu,miditower and monitor, and I seem to be the last person on earth to buy a stationary computer. Its all laptops from here on, and lets face it: you cant get a laptop gaming rig. Most people buy their laptops for web-surfing, work, etc, and an XBOX or PS3 with Guitar Hero for gaming. Sucks to admit it, but its the truth.

..."and maybe we can actually start offering it up at a lower price point in the future. "
HAHAHAHAHA!!!

When this guy starts making decent games i'll listen. Good games sell well, mediocre one's don't. No wonder he's taking that stance.

If PC gaming is to survive it'll come down to two things:

1. DRM with an online component, like Steam.
or
2. The PCGA starts designing and supporting motherboard level DRM, like the Xbox 360. You did notice that AMD, Intel, Nvidia, and ATI are members, right? Along with Microsoft?

The industry simply can't survive if piracy is so easy it's pretty much a "pay if you want" model.

No, the amount of bandwidth needed would be obnoxious and requiring me to be online to play a game I bought is just something I will never be okay with.

It's funny how much is Chris Taylor whining about pc piracy, given that Supreme Commander sold fine.

In fact, SupCom is a hardcore RTS game with a very distinct gameplay from the mainstream RTS, and with very steep computer requisites (before Crysis it was the premium cpu game benchmark); with these two "features" in mind, it didn't sell just fine, but very well!!.

Wheres the fun if we can't pirate anymore? No free music or games anymore? I'm gonna cry... I feel like my mom is coming down on me ...

DRM only penalizes legitimate customers.

Anyone who says otherwise is programming a DRM system they want you to buy and use on your product.

From their end? No. I won't support such a thing. I don't mind steam as much, but loading everything off their server and having the game's life tied to how long they decide to host? At least with steam I can patch the game or "fix it" to work without steam should they yank the plug.

If all the files are on their end and they discontinue it....then what? No thanks, it would be the death of classic gaming. If we wanted to play a 10 year old game and it was discontinued under this model we'd be shit out of luck. No thanks.

He's obviously talking about games like WoW, where the core is running on the server, and you can't play at all if you're not logged in.

oh goody here we go again. this is where I cite developers like stardock and tell anyone who demands control over my pc to kiss my ass. 'secure' almost always means heavy drm

This plays off of Shnapple's post a bit, but it got long and tangential so it became its own comment... in reply.

Getting closer and closer to the death of anonymous multiplayer PC gaming.

I use Steam because the system has added value (i.e.: online game title purchasing and delivery). If your method doesn't have any added value beyond multiplayer and stats, then I'm not biting. Part of why I didn't buy UT3 (along with my opposition to GameSpy running the backend for the auth system).

I also don't want to be stuck calling a helplessdesk in Hyderabad just because the central server decided to ban me because my account failed authentication two times within the first three days after the last quarter lunar phase, or because some server admin fatfingered an account ID number in a permaban command.

Personally I don't mind games that assume internet connectivity for the purposes of security. An automatic handshake or a simple user/password is effective and not overly intrusive. Plus I think it's safe to say that gamers without 24/7 access to the internet at their computer are an insignificant minority these days.

There are four ways of securing a product.

You can secure a product with a physical object (what you have - CD check/dongle), its location (where you are playing it - machine authentication), what you know (username/password for online) or who you are (biometrics).

We've just had to move to tier 3, but even it isn't foolproof or for every product.

I don't really like the model he's proposing...part of that is that I can't get any broadband out here at all...so I'm stuck on 26.4k dialup (first person to mention satellite needs to realize that beside the inherent 1000-2000ms pings...you've also got severe bandwidth restrictions coupled with draconian measures for those who break said restrictions because its basically an unworkable technology at this point).

I think he's right, and people are somewhat missunderstanding what Taylor is on to...

Software is fast becoming a live service, changing and evolving to meet the needs of a living audience. This is much more lucrative (and more entertaining) than static software. WoW, Google, Facebook, etc... the whole "web 2.0" trend really proves Taylor's point as more and more people are coming to expect software that reacts.

Take a game like HL2 -- you might play it a few times, but the story is the same. Compare that to WoW where the environment changes, and you'll see the difference. Hopefully PC devs will "get it" and we'll begin to see better uses of Software as a Service in the game industry than just EQ clones...

I'm with him right up until the whole "an industry in which data would be accessed from a central server rather than directly from the user's PC"

No. Fuck that. Put it on Steam, let me play it when I want (yes, I'll authenticate) and give me non-MMO games and I'm with you. Make me run it off of a server like it's Second Life and you've lost me. I get what you're going for, but it's not going to happen.

It's like all those people who believe that disc-based formats will go away in favor of downloading all of your movies online in HD. No, they won't. The guy in the next cube to me lives in the country where crappy satellite is the only broadband option. My ISP Time Warner is trying out bandwidth caps in Beaumont. Until broadband is 100% ubiquitous at all times, this "running off the server" bit isn't going to happen.

Again, I'm with you except for that. Make me authenticate every time I play, fine. Make every game run through Steam, fine. But don't make me run it off of a central server.

As long as the future likes somewhat like that Steam thingy, I don't mind I guess. :)

Go Valve Go!