Piracy Troubles Finally Solved

warning: Creating default object from empty value in /home/buckman/public_html/neo/modules/advanced_forum/advanced_forum.module on line 492.
Chris Kennedy's picture

After years of struggle between those that would create software and those that would steal it, Capcom has finally found the perfect, DRM-free way to prevent people from stealing the PC version of Super Street Fighter IV.

They're just not going to release it.

Producer Yoshinori Ono stated that the PC platform was "number one in piracy." He said that the game would essentially be considered free on the PC platform. He didn't rule out a possible release for the PC sometime in the future - possibly after a powerful copy protection solution is achieved.

Source - Gamasutra

We know that this struggle between software companies, end users, and pirates has raged for several "eras" of computer gaming. Is this really the direction things are headed now? While consoles are not considered perfect when it comes to copy protection of software, they do create a much more controlled environment for companies to release their software. As consoles approach PCs in terms of capabilities, do companies just believe that simply ignoring the PC as a gaming platform is the way to go?

I certainly hope that this is a Capcom-only way of thinking. They certainly do just fine in the console market. Perhaps this means they can safely ignore the PC gamers' market.

While I don't game on PC as I did throughout the late eighties and on through the nineties, I am quick to raise my hand and state that the PC gives a different feel to gaming AND also easily spans multiple eras compared to a console. Don't get me wrong - I am certainly a fan of consoles, but to see a software company practically give up simply because they don't want to worry about piracy is absolutely ridiculous.

I guess the lesson here is that we just shouldn't make PC games anymore.

Wait....what?

Comments

Erkan (not verified)
Wow, I am maybe strange but I

Wow, I am maybe strange but I actually bought SF4 for PC on Steam, with a USB modded Saturn joypad it is a joy to play :-)

No disc to worry about, instant loading, ability to run anti-alizing and high resolutions, it is a very nice port and looks fantastic on the PC.

I do not mind sitting in the chair playing either, if I would want to I could just attach HDMI to the 52" in the living room, but I am afraid I may fall a sleep if I begin gaming in the sofa. Also it is easier to notice details etc when you are up close to a TFT.

To bad they wont release this one, I might have just had to buy it to but now I will have to leech the arcade rom 10 years from now :-)

Matt Barton
Matt Barton's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/16/2006
There are problems with

There are problems with consoles, too, though. For one thing, they aren't typically as easy to expand, so game devs might get stuck with an outmoded platform for several more years--there's no scaling; it's just whether it works on the original config or not. A dev working on a new Xbox 360 game must make it work flawlessly and optimally on a system that was released five years ago. Many (probably not most) PC owners have upgraded by that time. Even my university has a turnaround policy (IIRC, it's every 4 years for a brand new PC or Mac). So, whereas a PC dev can either support the cutting edge or, more logically, offer a scaled experience (such as with Civ V), the 360 dev has to work with outmoded hardware. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, of course, and software techniques gradually improve over time--squeezing more juice out of the hardware--but I don't see how you can deny this as a factor. I figure this generation will last longer than the previous two because of the terrible economy, so it could (unlikely, but possible) end up that the major consoles are still the Wii/360/PS3 five years from now. If that's the case, there could be a huge 10-year gap between the PC and console experience.

I also think Rob is correct about the difficulties of working with PCs. I have seen countless people who are blatantly ignorant of their machines, even scared of them, and of course relying on some poor schmuck to "fix their PC" instead of educating themselves. I have known people who could not even be bothered to figure out their iPods. Even some fairly hardcore gamers I know have terrible problems with viruses and such (to the point where their machines are inoperable). Mostly, it's because they are surfing for porn with IE or using illegal P2P stuff with no protection in place. Trying to teach them about Firefox and Noscript is an uphill battle, and they typically just shrug and go back to their consoles (so easy, me just plug in disc!).

n/a
Bill Loguidice
Bill Loguidice's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
On the contrary, I consider

I agree more or less, though I consider the locked down nature of the consoles to be a strong positive, not a negative. It allows developers time to master the hardware and all but the Wii are still powerful enough to deliver top line experiences for the next several years. It's typically the consoles that drive new game development these days anyway, so consoles are not really beholden to any potential advances that maybe 3% of the PC gaming population would have access to anyway. Honestly, I've wanted locked down PC configurations since the days of the 486, simply because I've wanted the software to catch up to the hardware. It wouldn't kill PC's to have locked down specs, even if it were three years at a time (meaning, if you have at least x, y, and z, you can run any new game with good performance).

I can't envision any game experience that will be developed in the next several years that would need any more power than the Xbox 360 and PS3 presently offer (even true 3D games that require 3D TV's, can work just fine on the current systems). In fact, in many ways, consoles are leading the way in innovation with motion controls/body tracking (and I'll agree it's debatable whether or not that's a good thing, but it's still another "new" option). It's the PC gamers that will be left out for the most part.

n/a
Matt Barton
Matt Barton's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/16/2006
Lock Downs
Bill Loguidice wrote:

I agree more or less, though I consider the locked down nature of the consoles to be a strong positive, not a negative. It allows developers time to master the hardware and all but the Wii are still powerful enough to deliver top line experiences for the next several years.

I strongly agree on this as well. It seems a lot easier for hardware to leap forward than software, and that's been the case all throughout the history. The longer software folks have with a machine, the more they'll be able to do. Plus, the techniques they work out could very well leapfrog the next generation altogether! I know I've seen plenty of late C-64 and NES games that looked like Amiga or SNES games!

Quote:

I can't envision any game experience that will be developed in the next several years that would need any more power than the Xbox 360 and PS3 presently offer (even true 3D games that require 3D TV's, can work just fine on the current systems). In fact, in many ways, consoles are leading the way in innovation with motion controls/body tracking (and I'll agree it's debatable whether or not that's a good thing, but it's still another "new" option). It's the PC gamers that will be left out for the most part.

I'm still very skeptical of all this. As you said in your video, the motion control stuff isn't really appealing to hardcore gamers. It's the family in the living room, doing exercises or bowling. To me it just seems too gimmicky. Same for 3D games. If it didn't work back in the 80s, I don't know why suddenly 3D would be so popular now. It's just a fad that comes and goes.

In short, I think Microsoft and Sony's motion, camera, and 3D stuff will all be epic fails with their audience.

n/a
Bill Loguidice
Bill Loguidice's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Pontificating
Matt Barton wrote:

I'm still very skeptical of all this. As you said in your video, the motion control stuff isn't really appealing to hardcore gamers. It's the family in the living room, doing exercises or bowling. To me it just seems too gimmicky. Same for 3D games. If it didn't work back in the 80s, I don't know why suddenly 3D would be so popular now. It's just a fad that comes and goes.

In short, I think Microsoft and Sony's motion, camera, and 3D stuff will all be epic fails with their audience.

First, I will address the 3D stuff. I strongly believe that 3D is the wave of the future and WILL become a standard, just not in its current form. Once glasses-less 3D is readily available at only a small premium over standard displays, I think we'll see truly positive momentum in this regard. Right now it's too expensive and requires glasses, which can be annoying beyond short bursts. I believe the Nintendo 3DS will be a HUGE hit and will lead the way, followed by things like a 3D iPad, 3D phones, etc., until finally we have them standard in large TV's. This is probably still about 5 years out before we start to see this technology everywhere (albeit in still limited quantities), but that will also allow current 3D tech requiring glasses to gain some traction as well. After all, the PS3 and certain BluRay players have native 3D TV support, and there are quality NVidia solutions on the PC side. Right now, it's a niche, but the 3DS will be the start of leading it out of that niche.

As for the motion controls, it's just another way to continue to expand the audience for videogames that the Wii was so masterful at. The hardcore games will come, led by Sony's efforts. They're already working on integrating it into pre-existing games, like Heavy Rain, which is a good start and will at minimum provide valuable experience on what does and doesn't work. With that said, we'll only see the potential of these things when games are designed specifically for the tech (much like you only see the true beauty of 3D when you see a film designed for it like Avatar, versus a film, like Clash of the Titans or Alice in Wonderland, that were processed for 3D from a 2D source). A game like "Sorcery" for the PS3 could be one such game for the Move (http://www.amazon.com/Sorcery-Playstation-3/dp/B003O6HAS2/ref=sr_1_1?s=g...).

While I don't care for the way the Move controller is integrated into the PS3's interface control, I'm more than a little intrigued by the possibilities of using Microsoft's Kinect to control that system's interface. If done right, it will be a bit like "Minority Report" (http://ronniediaz.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/minorityreportinterface.jpg), which would open up a whole range of new possibilities. If done poorly, it will be a frustrating gimmick. So again, there's great potential there, particularly with the horsepower in place that the Wii always lacked. If these are just the testing grounds for this stuff, there's also the hope that all of this will be just about perfected by the next generation of systems, again, opening up tremendous possibilities for truly new and compelling game experiences (I think anyone would be intrigued by a quality, fully 3D, controllerless game, right? Again, one step closer to the holodeck.). With all that said, the best part is that the traditional controller/control methods will be here to stay. Just like the keyboard and eventually mouse have never found a superior, I seriously doubt a regular controller will either. It doesn't mean there can't be awesome companions, though.

n/a
Matt Barton
Matt Barton's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/16/2006
I don't think we actually

I don't think we actually disagree about this stuff. I always leave open the possibility that some really clever or innovative designer will come along with a killer app, whether that be 3D, motion control, or some combination of the two. I just haven't seen anything yet that has really felt like a killer app to me. As far as I can see, Nintendo owns the casual games market for consoles and probably always will. They are the Disney of the industry. Microsoft and Sony moving into this market seems like a foolish act of desperation to me.

There are many problems with 3D that you have already mentioned. Many of them are eliminated when you no longer need to wear special glasses and have great games designed specifically for the environment. Yet I doubt it will be anything more than, at best, one moderate hit (such as Avatar) followed by countless quick and dirty conversions. The people who invest in the tech will buy the shovelware just to have something to play on it, and will quickly get disillusioned with the whole mess.

The 3DS is more interesting to me, but I'll be very skeptical until I see one in person. If it is as amazing as the promotional stuff I've seen, it could be something very special--though again I wonder if it could really be anything more than something that looks cool at first but quickly gets tiring (such as the Virtualboy).

I'd love to skip the 3D stuff and go straight to hologram technology. I don't know much about the theories and such behind it, but I'll be impressed when we get something like the chess board we saw in the original Star Wars movie. I would love to play a game like Baldur's Gate with that tech (as well as fighting games), where your characters looked like living miniatures on a table.

n/a
Bill Loguidice
Bill Loguidice's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
It can be argued we already have it
Matt Barton wrote:

I'd love to skip the 3D stuff and go straight to hologram technology. I don't know much about the theories and such behind it, but I'll be impressed when we get something like the chess board we saw in the original Star Wars movie. I would love to play a game like Baldur's Gate with that tech (as well as fighting games), where your characters looked like living miniatures on a table.

Technically that stuff is already here, just not in a projected form. For instance, the PS3 has Eye of Judgment, which is very much like the Star Wars chess board, and the aforementioned EyePet. All of these involve placing the gamer virtually, in real-time, within the game world and interacting with the pieces. The difference is is that instead of projecting the game world into the real world, the real world is projected into the game world. The interactions and concepts are exactly the same, just in the reverse. It's a "trivial" technical matter at this point to do the opposite and stand along holograms have already been proven feasible. In fact, it's arguable that taking those aforementioned game concepts and applying 3D (with or without glasses), you can in fact achieve 100% of the effect of the Star Wars chess set.

n/a
Bill Loguidice
Bill Loguidice's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
You would think arcades would

You would think arcades would be the first proving ground for large scale glasses-less 3D displays, but I guess the first attempts (outside of traditional headsets) will require "glasses": http://www.gizmag.com/konami-road-fighters-3d-arcade-game/16501/?utm_sou...

n/a

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.