Client-Server != DRM

by kapowaz, Sunday, March 24, 2013, 17:30 (4271 days ago) @ narcogen

However, I think it's a fair bet that the picture above is complete enough to draw the reasonable conclusion that for people who opt out of the network features and play solo, the always-on requirement ends up functioning the same as DRM: it stops you from playing a game you've bought in a manner that would technically be possible if not for the arbitrary always online requirement. That may or may not mean the connection is being used for other purposes-- anti-cheating, anti-piracy-- but it's DRM no matter how one looks at it.

I bought the Mists of Pandaria expansion for World of Warcraft when it came out, but due to lack of free time I didn't get around to playing it until a few months after launch. I spent a week off work and decided I'd explore the new zones and level my character up to 90. I played through all the various quests and explored the new continent, enjoying the storylines unfolding before me. I did this all entirely on my own. After I reached level 90, I essentially stopped playing and haven't really logged in since, treating the experience as a fun, single player experience.

Does this mean World of Warcraft employs DRM? Is the choice truly ‘arbitrary’ when the game takes place in a persistent setting — whether or not I choose to make use of the multiplayer features of the game? A World of Warcraft player who played the game in a similar fashion to me a couple of years ago would have experienced the world changing beneath their very feet when the Cataclysm expansion was released, which permanently changed the game world for all players. This is one of the tools at Blizzard's disposal when they choose to forge a persistent world for players to immerse themselves in. Will Bungie be doing the same?

It's too early to call it when so much of what we're discussing hinges on speculation, so I take issue with the word ‘arbitrary’ being used here. In recent weeks we've seen the absolute worst side of truly arbitrary ‘always-online’ play with Sim City, but for many years we've had persistent worlds which support solo play where one can truly say that the always-online requirement has absolutely nothing to do with enforcing digital rights, and is purely a technical decision. Which side of the fence Destiny falls on we'll have to wait and see, but let's not start throwing around the mud just yet, eh?