I don't see it as flaming :)

Its a very good question I seriously pondered about for some time. It would be a nice option for my personal moral dilemma. But in the end the bigwigs responsible do not see it the way more grounded ppl see it. To them it sends 2 seperate messages:
1. somebody bought it, so we are doing good and ppl accept our DRM system.
2. somebody pirated it, so we need more DRM (No.1 buys anyway :P ).

Lazy as I am I go for option 3). Don't bother and occasional rant a bit about it.

The problem with that "it sends a message.."-argument is that you can only speak/voting for yourself, I mean there product is still purchased but used illegally which frankly I would argue is a rather petty technicality (sorry lawyers :P). I don't know, maybe I'm too pragmatic and I don't want to see it from an idealist's point of view or as a strictly moral dilemma.

Neither of those reasons are major issues.

First, trojans shouldn't be an issue if you know how it works but for the general public or the average illiterate computer person I would agree that it holds as a argument. Still, if you're somone who cares about DRM you're likely someone who would take the trouble to research what it would be about which mean you're not really an irrational person that accepts things as they're and would like take a critical point of view of the issue. Researching about pirated copies and trojan won't be a big deal.

DLCs and updates I agree, that can be tricky but you'll have to weigh the pros and cons. Should I give up my stance on DRM-free games or should I accept something like Steam that keep everything neat and tidy with automatic updates? I suppose it comes down to if you rather search for updates on the net but when you do you can keep playing a game without Steam as opposed to the convenience of Steam but then you'll have to accept Steam as a client is a requirement.

As for legal actions that likely depends on where you live and how you do it. As far as I've read there are very few people who get caught for piracy unless they're actively involved in huge networks of distributing the illegal copies for financial gain but while I wouldn't want to promote actual illegal activities you could still act with judgement, using a method to avoid getting caught but make sure you pay for a legal copy to deal with the moral dilemma while at the same time making sure you actually paid for a commercialised product you use. It's a grey area but I think it's important to discuss and actively see if a solution like that would be acceptable.

I take it then you never vote in elections either? After all, it is just one vote.

Your argument also shoots a big hole in the idea of buying games to support developers of games you like. After all, your measly $50 (or less) won't matter anything in the cosmic scale, when the game development costs are much higher than $50. So we could all just as well pirate all our games without paying for them?

Either way, I don't buy this idea that having some principles, and standing by them, is somehow a stupid idea. I commend people for voting with their wallets, instead of ridiculing them for it.

No? Why then did some people get so excited about e.g. CDPR going after the Witcher 2 pirates? ;)

Pirated apps and games are one of the main venues to get people to install unwanted trojans to their PCs. Think about it: how else are you able to lure people to install malware willingly to their PCs?

Virus scanners are far from perfect in catching all the latest malware. So what exactly does that "research" mean in practice? Reading a couple of other user comments on torrent pages trying to convince you "No there are no trojans, and even if your virus scanner claims there is, it is just a false positive.".

There are enough reported cases of pirated torrents including intentional malware.

Regarding politics, I do it because at least I negate someone else's vote that I disagree with regardless if I feel like I make a difference.

And yes I know the argument doesn't work if you actually want to make a difference supporting them but to support wasn't the idea of "making a difference" in the first place but following the law that you have to pay for a commercialized product and offset the moral dilemma. Just because it fails in the "it doesn't make a difference for 1 against many" doesn't mean it won't hold up with the other two.

And while I agree we need some principles following them blindly and thinking they might make a difference (outside of our own view or attachment) is more of a general guideline than a specific rule for every situation. I suppose I don't see a need for an argument here but I might come back to this point later.

Excited? Yeah, I'm just going to paraphrase the evidence SimonG posted about some dirty law firm sending out threats about legal action that they weren't allowed on the premise that they can't lose a case where a common person would try to defend against them. CDPR made a huge mistake on that one and while it's a pity many people pirated their game, their 'solution' was a long way from practical. As for excitement behind other people I would argue that those people that are against piracy and enjoy the idea of prosecuted pirates have an emotional attachment to the issue e.g they would say 'justice shall be served!' or some other generic comment instead of wanting to take on the issue at hand with a solution that would help both sides (publishers/developers and customers).

Use multiple virus scanner sources like VirusTotal (uses multiple, different engines) and weighing the belief of such comments of how safe it could be. Again, this is on your own risk and everybody knows it, the point is with enough testing you could learn to see pattern and be careful enough that it wouldn't become an issue. I'm not saying it's a perfect solution but it sure as hell is one closer to an actual solution than a boring turn out of Ocham's Razor and say "You know what, DRM is ok. I go to Steam instead. Problem solved." or perhaps "I stop with video games, I won't need to think on DRM anymore).

Before I discovered GOG, I used Steam for my game fix. I rarely purchased games because of the feeling I was renting games. I did not want to use other similiar clients, and if games were not on Steam, but on another client I would choose not to ever play that game.
Now that I have found GOG, I purchase all my games here. If the game is not available here, I will not purchase it unless Steam has it for under $10. I have enough of a backlog of games that I do not care it the newest bestest greatest game is on Steam for $50. And if it is on another client only then I still have no intention of purchasing it.
So to some up if it's not on GOG or Steam then I will not purchase it.

Oh, and MMO's I have no interest in whatsoever.

My most recent DRM encrusted game I really wanted was SimCity. I've played every other Sim City before the current one, but I have not and will not play that DRM encrusted piece of shit. Give me a true Off-Line Single Player, no DRM game and I will willing shell out $50 for the game, but if it is online only then it's value to me is shit (I wouldn't pay 1 penny for it).

GOG, Humble, Indie Royale, Indie Game Stand, directly from the devs, Bundle in a Box once in a blue moon. No. I don't have a TV, and watch movies in single digits per year. I don't "get" keeping up with pop culture firsthand. Kind of, yes. I've heard good things about Dark Souls from a dev I respect; when I get a PC that can run it, I'm going to obtain a DRM-free copy. I also wish MMORPGs licensed out their server software to just anyone; I'd be willing to live with DRM that would help to ensure the devs were getting their license fees. No. When I first started using steam, I thought it was the best thing ever since water-resistant chain lube. Then I grew to hate the experience so much I'd rather play Freecell than launch a steam game. I know it's even worse now, what with hats and collectible cards and various cross-promotions. I wouldn't use Steam even if it was DRM-free. As for Origin, it's been two years since launch and STILL NO ENGLISH LANGUAGE. Fuck them with a razor dildo. I used to play WoW on a private server. I'd play it legally now if I had the time and if Blizzard didn't have a history of going NSA on its customers. No way I'm giving them money.

I figured it was from the Anna Kornakova porn video. Porn is one of the more malware infested media than probably all of the others combined.

That pretty much sums up my policy. While I have a few rare exceptions here and there, the only way for buying from Steam is not having extra shit slapped onto a game on top of Steam itself - I mean, seriously, what idiot thought it'd be a good idea to require Steam and install limits or a secondary client? Anyway, I try to give Valve as little money as possible. They've got enough already as is. Same goes for Origin. ... And I still managed to overpay during the summer sale despite me only buying a handful of games. Nope, these newer AAA games just aren't worth it. They may look oh so pretty, but they sure as hell lack the substance, more often than not. The X-COM remake was pretty much the only exception to that rule.

I also don't mind buying some older games on Steam that aren't available digitally (and legally) anywhere else, but, once again, also only on deep discount. Finally picked up a digital copy of Firaxis's Pirates remake for cheap last week, and I'm definitely considering picking up the Stronghold pack for Stronghold 2 & Legends and Railroad Tycoon 3 (now that I've finally found a fix for that silly 'too much VRAM' problem the game has) next time they're on sale.
Rayman Origins comes to mind as the PC version was DRM-free since release. Sadly, the same can't be said for its sequel.

That's the only one I can come up with though. Hm.

I buy games from the usual DRM-free places, GOG, Desura/Indie Royale, Humble Bundle, etc.

As for keeping up with the latest stuff - if I really want to know about new games, I can go check out gaming news sites and get a pretty good idea of them. I have a backlog of 100s of games (retail therapy can be a pain in the wallet but it's cheaper than the real thing), so I never lack games to play. I have a busy life and don't feel the need to rearrange what I do to increase my game-playing time, so it really doesn't bother me to get games later or not at all. I'd be OK with never buying a new game again, because at the rate I'm going it will take decades before I run out of new games to play.

I always hear this, but I've yet to actually see this rare DRM-free version. I heard it was the boxed copy, but I never saw it anywhere. Was it Europe only or something?

GOG is the first time I've seen it DRM-free.

You get better responses than me. I typically get a generic response of "We have no plans for this." When I get a response, that is. Other than one dev wanting to know why I didn't want Steam.
I've heard some people act as though Steam and PC gaming are interchangeable.

I have no issue pirating a game to play it. Typically the devs I email are ones who's games I played and liked. Never mentioned that to them, of course.

When I do buy, it's either GOG (rarely because of high prices), direct from devs (rarely because of high prices), or bundles (main source). I do like how devs are starting to price match other stores now though. Bought Gunpoint last Wednesday for $5 because the dev ended up matching the steam sale. Would have passed if not for that.

Off-topic, probably a bad buy, that game was really short, should have waited for a bit of a better sale. At least it has a level editor and custom levels.


Edit: Oh yeah. I don't buy from Gamersgate because they put their own DRM on all game, DRM-free for them just means third party DRM-free. Yeah, I know you can crack it, but I'd still be supporting that. And honestly, that pisses me off more than other DRM, because at least they are honest and don't claim to be DRM-free.

I don't buy from Amazon because so few of their games are DRM-free (or at least it isn't mentioned). Typically it's either a game I want that has DRM or lacks DRM information, or a game I don't want that's DRM-free.

Interested in Shinyloot, but have yet to see anything I want.

Huh. I think you're correct. Thought it applied to the digital copies as well, but I guess not.

Well, I wouldn't call it "cracking" when it's just a simple copy and paste action with the result of a truly DRM-free installer (which is good enough for me, and I feel entitled to it, too, if they announce a game as DRM-free), but you do have a point that they're being dishonest about the whole thing and kind of dilute the meaning of "DRM-free".

Personally I limit myself to buying only 3-4 DRM using games per year, I don't care if they use Steam, Origin or uPlay, the only thing I require is for them to not have an always online DRM and not be Indy games. (For Indies either it's DRM-free or no money from me). Most of the time I play on Console all DRM using games that I don't buy on PC, borrowing them from friends.

On the opposite side I tend to buy a lot for DRM-free games I will most probably never play just to support them. (that's especially true on GoG).

Concerning MMOs, well I don't like online games in general, so I don't play them, DRM or not.

Mostly here and the Humble Store. Not really. In my book, the latest is rarely the greatest. There are very few AAA titles that interest me these days. Yes. I really wanted to play GTA IV on PC, but Rockstar's "let's-see-how-many-hoops-we-can-make-them-jump-through-in-order-to-play-the-game-they-bought" attitude made sure that didn't happen. I do use Steam, just not very much, and I've never bought anything there, nor do I think I ever will. I have Valve's own games on Steam, but I bought them all retail. Then I have some Steam games from various Humble Bundles, and a few that I've been gifted.

I won't touch either Origin or UPlay with a 10-foot pole. I don't play MMOs, they've never interested me. If they did, I wouldn't mind. It's pointless to talk about DRM for multiplayer-only games, though. It's hard to complain about having to be online in order to be online.

However, in recent years, some publishers have taken to make "essential" features of otherwise ordinary singleplayer games "depend" on a constant internet connection (Diablo 3, SimCity, etc.), which is just a "clever" way (so they think) of forcing always-online DRM on people by pretending it's a necessity. I don't touch those games, even though I'd probably play them without the always-online requirement.

Digital rips have horrible quality. I've been waiting for larger HDDs before I rip my DVD collection, which I do plan to do. Bluray is a lot more protected so perhaps it won't be necessary.

I said as opposed to a disc check, not Steam DRM.