While nothing new (BUT WHAT IS NOWADAYS IN THE VIDEO GAME WORLD?), an examiner article cites that analysts predict that downloadable content will be the next wave in gaming.
Downloadable content has added value to many games, such as map packs for first person shooters, additional sections and areas of sandbox games and new hats for your custom fighter. Downloadable content as a stand-alone has also generated revenue for console makers, allowing them to rerelease old games for play on new systems, bringing updated versions of Street Fighter 2 or even entirely new games, like Megaman 9, to current-gen consoles.
However, one thing downloadable content adds is for publishers - protection from piracy. While many game manufacturers and console makers have continued in an escalating digital rights management (DRM) arms race with pirates who then work to crack whatever codes and encryption is put on discs and other games, companies like Valve have used the downloadable content model to protect or minimize damage from piracy.
An argument that frequently comes up in /v/ "piracy" threads is what would make it so that a pirate would stop "stealing" games. The answer to this is make the process neutral, enjoyable and simple. Going to a game store, like GameStop, involves a middle-man who frequently resells games from a business model that shortchanges both creator and buyer. Modding a system or cracking a CD allows a user to play a game for free. By forcing users to download content from the company, manufacturers create a loophole in the way games are purchased and consumed, one that forces a user to connect with the creators for validate and obtain new content as well as play games such as TF2 without the aid of "standalone" servers (as is popular... or rather, the only option for the pirating community).
DRM has been routinely considered a blow to the gaming community; it punishes only those who legally obtain copies of games by bogging down the title with extraneous software bordering on malware. However, if Steam is any indication, DRM can be more than just another speedbump for pirates to roll over.
Posts
What about the fact that every time I pop in a new game for PS3, there is a long download that occurs before I can even start. I started Bioshock a few weeks ago and had to 45 min before I could even begin. So why not just wait a little longer for the entire f-ing game to download...
ReplyDeleteSteam is DRM. Has everyone forgot about the release of Half-Life 2? True, Steam does add some benefits such as backing up and updating games (which is why few people hate it), but you still don't own the game and are completely reliant on their servers. Single player games shouldn't REQUIRE the Internet.
ReplyDeleteTo finish my thoughts from above, I would only pay <$20 for such games; never $35-$55. While multiplayer games are susceptible to their developer's servers shutting down by their very nature, single players mode should never be. What you have then is a rental. Same goes for movies; I bought Terminator 2 that had a High-Def version for Windows Media Player(and required a license update every 5 days). 3 years later, the server that issued the licenses shut down, and the disc is now a coaster. People naturally get pissed by this lack of disclosure and refuse to pay much (if anything) for such content again. Who's to say the same won't happen to Steam? Steam fanboys will be up in arms then, I can imagine...
ReplyDelete