Not far from my C:\_prompt blinking punishment, in fact.

Programmers are that much smarter than anyone -- but we aren't talking about games only, aren't we?

Which is fine... but it isn't going to deter the majority of those that pirate now.  When one doesn't have the money to spend on a 60$ game, then they will put up with these inconveniences if they want to play the game badly enough.

As for the support, and the game manual, these are NOT hard to find on FREE forums.  No, it's not support directly from the developers, but it's support none-the-less.  An example?  Yahoo Answers.  Yes, you would have to take the advice with a grain of salt, but it is there, and it is free.  There are hundreds of these kinds of forums.

How about the newest gimmick for border crossing between Canada & the US? Microchip sealed into your Driver permits.

Financial markets worldwide; Can investors beat the clock in a second or less?

Yep, that much. Humility included... because that's what they're paid for.

Not privacy, not security -- at all.

The treasures of individuality are protected, more so now than ever.

Terrible advice. It reverses the usual effect piracy has - spreading word of mouth and increasing interest in the game. Your potential customers are going to talk to other gamers online, asking for opinions etc and they'll respond "This game is crap, it crashes all the time, I lost X hours of my progress due to corrupted savegame (...)" etc. This is the worst possible way to fight piracy. They aren't going to blame anti-piracy countermeasures. They're going to ruin your reputation, and rightly so.

Look no further than Titan Quest to see how it works in practice. Forums full of angry people reporting crash to desktop and their posts are ignored. I don't know about you, but one of first things I do when considering buying a game is checking the game's forums. If people are having a lot of problems, I'm not buying it, period.

If you're going to fight piracy, you should provide better overall service. Or at least good enough so paying a small price is worth it to avoid trojans and other malware pirated games can have. Skip retail so you don't have to pay fixed cost for each copy sold. Experiment with price and make it as low as possible. Surely you've heard about 50% discount on L4D increasing the sales (revenue) 3000 percent ? http://www.edge-online.com/features/valve-are-games-too-expensive . And forget DRM, the only people stuck with it are legitimate customers.

We're still beating a dead-horse - read this thread, then compare notes on anybody's opinion on DRM.

Just to add my 2 cents, I personally have never had an issue with DRM.

Its not that simple, anyone remember when some country (i forget what one now) blocked a video from youtube? It ended up blocking the whole of youtube for half the globe due to their screw up.

The solution that Stardock have come up with and their latest invention GOO are the best ways to combat piracy without computer intrusive DRM that ends up screwing your computer up.

DRM is like criminal punishment. Nobody likes it (well, at least the people who actually EXPERIANCE it don't like it), but it is sort of necessary because if you don't have it, you would be completely destroyed. I think that it is in a way self-regulating, because if it gives people TOO much of a hassle they will just pirate the game and write nasty replies on the company's forums, and the company will be forced to back off a little. It's like a lot of things in the game world: the best option is somewhere in the middle.

Titan Quest had triggers that were going off for legitimate users. A poor implementation. And yet dozens of games have implemented this approach. Does it work? Who knows, I don't have the statistics and won't jump to conclusions. Does it annoy and deter pirates? Yes.

DRM is a funny thing. In the 90's when CD protections were easily cracked and warezed games readily available people were fine with it. But now that protections are harder to crack and pirates getting more headaches from pirated copies, people start whining about DRM. Make of that what you will.

Interesting observation, but you fail to note that the 'DRM' in the 90s didn't give the legitimate users nearly the headaches and hassle the current DRM does. I'd say the latter is the reason for the 'whining'. Is it really harder for pirates to crack now? It sure doesn't seem that way from what I've been reading.

It is. Particularly in the PC game arena the protections have vastly improved. As for the headaches you mention, I've never had them. But that's just me I guess.

Scoutdog:

You will only be 'completely destroyed' if you insist on keeping current business model. Sooner or later game developers will need to change.

I own a legitimate copy of DROD:Journey To Rooted Hold and it contains no copy protection. Actually it's open-source. But the last time I checked, DROD sells very well for an indie game. A sequel was released and multiple paid level packs were released (typically one per season). This is interesting because DROD demo not only has a fully functional level editor -  it's open-source. Many user-made holds (level packs) are good, but few of them come close to the level of polish official level packs have. It appears people are willing to pay for that. Another thing Caravel is doing is providing another scarce good you can pay for - CaravelNET subscription. It provides access to many extras, like being able to spectate other players in realtime, submit highscores, donload best replays, and offers much more integrated experience in general. Additionally, while demo is fully functional in many ways, full version contains more visual styles allowing for more varied level generation with editor. (not to mention one LARGE polished level set)

http://caravelgames.com/Articles/Games.html

Have you ever had a game that requires CD to be in drive while playing ? What happens if the disc gets scratched ? It's not like CD's are very durable...

How about Prey ? I bought it because i knew it was on DooM III engine (id games are written cross-platform and are famous for working well on Linux, even if there's no native port). Despite of having a legitimate copy, I had to download a crack because the game's copy protection was interfering with wine.

Another example: Fish Fillets 2 _demo_. It contains SecuSuck or something similar. Suffice to say the demo didn't work in wine, because copy protection made it complain about being run in a debugger. So what ? I obtained the _demo_ in a perfectly legit way, why does it care what do I use to play the game ?

(FF1 was initially commercial but was comercially unsuccessful and was released for free along with source code. It's a great puzzle game and you can download it here: http://fillets.sourceforge.net/ )

That too. I realised a while back that there are actually TWO ways to survive (if not thrive) in a pirate-filled world. The status quo and your idea. The problem with the status quo is that, while it regulates the system fairly well, nobody in it is at all happy. Your method wou.ld work, but it is hard toget people to give stuff away, even if they can sell expansions later.

I don't take credit for this idea because it's not mine. It's mostly from techdirt and Ernest Adams from Bullfrog/Gamasutra.

Here's an another idea. I understand that completely switching business model on the first try (starting with a full new game) is a pretty big leap and a risk. You could try that with a big content pack for an already existing game. Even in a game like Elemental(sold in a traditional way), which is supposed to derive a large portion of fresh blood from user-made content. Say there's bunch of features that currently can't be modded due to engine limitations. A significant portion of the engine would have to be rewritten to add some cool new functionality and modding options, etc. So you'd announce that this kind of change would take some development time and effort (which could be spent on another game, for example). And you start collecting pledges rather than donations. Declarations from people willing to pay for a cool addition. Once there are enough pledges (it's best to keep the process open like Wikipedia does - I mean that players see how much $$$ is already declared) you collect the money and only then start working on the expansion. Once it's done, it's released for free for anyone who already has the base game. Releasing for free to 'everyone' may have a beneficial side effect - expansion packs in games with multiplayer component are infamous for dividing community.

This is a more cautious approach. You could test the waters with pledge-fuelled expansion rather than full game. You'd only take expenses if there's enough demand, so there's no risk that you don't break even. Of course, there's risk of alienating player base if they feel like they're being ripped and pay for patches. Stuff like patches that merely fix what's broken and add sorely needed functionality (imperfections in interface or online server browser...) should remain free. Hopefully middle ground can be found. Also, perhaps it would be wise to only collect pledges/declarations from people who already own 1+ of your games. Additionally, there could be incentives to be among the ones that paid for the expansion. Say, people who funded the development get to play with new stuff 2 weeks earlier. (E.g. a new nation - people who haven't paid could play against it in multiplayer, but would have to wait 2 weeks to get access)

In short, it would be like 'content packs' seen in some other games, except that 1) You take money before you spend time on development 2) it's released for free for everyone who already has the game. I think people would be more likely to pay in advance for small 'content packs', and would have more positive attitude if everyone in game's community would get it. No splitting community this way. No barriers for people who join the game community late. This should translate into longer lifespan of the game.