CompuServe Thread

#Market Survey

9 messages in this thread
#99416From: Perry S. Kivolowitz/ASDDec 22, 1987 2:23 PM
We are about to release our first entertainment software (otherwise known as a game). We would like to solicit your input concerning our idea for purchase verification. Here goes: The game will ask for a registration number. If you can't provide one it will allow you to play any 1 level of the game. The registration number will NOT be included in the package. To get the registration number you have to register your purchase by mail using a registration card we include. We should be able to return all registration cards the same day we receive them so turn around should be quite fast. We will pay for the postage of the registration number back to you. This seems fair but we'd like to know what you think. Please, no mindless flames about the worth of purchase verification. The game will be released with some kind of verification or not at all.
#99419From: Ben BlishDec 22, 1987 2:53 PM
<mindless flame>
#99421From: Karl SparklinDec 22, 1987 3:19 PM
Irritating. But so is manual-keywords. The method you suggest would be a major annoyance at the outset (or worse if the Brutes In Blue lose the damn thing), but would be less infuriating thereafter than "where did I put that &^%%@$#&^**manual!?!" An interesting solution, at any rate, if you indeed have to muck up your creation with this tripe. I understand. Eager to see what you have to offer, Karl Sparklin
#99422From: Ariel ButlerDec 22, 1987 3:25 PM
Perry, some comments: (1) It beats copy protecting the disk. (2) The U.S. Snail wait is going to really infuriate some people, who feel they shouldn't have to wait to use software they've already paid for. Your method would probably work a lot better if they paid AFTER they got to try out a few levels. (3) No matter how clever the scheme (and sometimes inversely proportional to it) you'll gain a few weeks at best. (I know, you know this already, sorry.) (4) It's probably worth a try if no one's already bombed with it. The worst that can happen is it gets cracked early, which would result in nearly the same distribution it would have had if "unverified".
#99424From: Bill EastburnDec 22, 1987 3:42 PM
Interesting approach! I would be interested in hearing how it works out. My first thoughts are that you should provide a way to get that registration number via a WATS line or perhaps on-line contact with the company. That way the game-o-holics out there in computerland would be able to lose at all levels the first day.
#99425From: Steve AhlstromDec 22, 1987 4:04 PM
I wouldn't buy a product which I couldn't use for a week or more. The "we will pay for the postage of the registration number back to you" worries me also. It implies that I have to pay postage to get it to you in the first place. Since I don't normally send in warranty cards except for high ticket items this just adds another layer of aggravation and delay. Provide a toll free number for instant registration and the idea may work. Otherwise, it'll have to be the game of the century for people to be willing to put up with the hassle.
#99432From: Ted HaskellDec 22, 1987 4:39 PM
Perry, I'm sorry but this nonsense is just getting completely out of control. Either you developers want to provide software that is of maximum utility and convenience to the purchaser with REASONABLE restrained consideration for the problems of the market place, or get out and stop making everybody's life miserable.
#99815From: Brian MaguireDec 24, 1987 8:24 AM
Perry, As you may remember, I publish educational software aimed at the college market — a high piracy area if there ever was one. Normally we avoid protection because of the customer reaction, and rely on low price and docs to get people to buy. I agree with you that that would NEVER work with a game. But, again, as a publisher, I think your planned scheme will lead to trouble. The administrative hassles will be enormous– unless there is a simple algorithm for generating the registration numbers and then that algorithm will be on the pirate boards within days of publication. My suggestion would be to go with the key word in the docs approach. It sure as heck isn't foolproof, but it helps and it requires very little support by the publisher (the only problem I've found is typos — you do have to be really careful there). We are using that method with what we consider to be our most piracy prone products. -Brian
#99858From: Kevin E. CarlinDec 24, 1987 12:45 PM
I'll stand with Ted Haskell (as opposed to his "interpreters" in this thread). You can keep the game and the boondoggle (but thanks for the warning). I hate piracy, personally, but I am just as fed up with vendors who sabotage their own product under the delusion that this stops anyone or does anything but encourage the notion that piracy is a valid concept among immature minds. This may not be the kind of response you solicited, Perry, but it is a valid response within the context of the industry. I know too many kids for whom the arts of piracy itself has become the game. — Kevin