Hypothetical scenario. Learning from mistakes in SC2: WoL, what if Blizzard decided to make changes to their DRM for Heart of the Swarm and Legacy of the Void?

In WoL, we're already aware that an initial activation check-in is required to play offline. Even on the retail box, it said "Internet Connection Required" which concerned a lot of people before Blizzard clarified what they intended.

If HOTS were to require a persistent online connection, groups could still crack the game because all content it still included with the game. A simple bypass or authentication emulator is all that would be needed. But, what if they were to design the game a little more like Diablo 3 though?

In HOTS, they will likely still include all level design, maps, scripting, missions, and audio/video assets locally. Excluding server side achievements, player communication, and game saves, let's say that they left out one very important aspect of the game that's difficult to emulate: Server Side AI.

Many games that require persistent online connections can still be cracked, since you already have the full game, and they don't need any streaming data from the server (other than for achievements or online chat). It's just used for authentication based copy protection.

But, what if the streaming data was critical and gameplay actually depended on it? (D3 servers do map designs, random chance, loot drops, proactive (made in advance) combat calculations, movement, NPC AI, etc. SC2 would just need server side AI and everything could still be stored locally.)

Of course, this would all depend on piracy issues, loss of revenue, and research using their own internal statistics. Blizzard would be well aware of how popular the "offline versus online" versions are. And Blizzard has really been pushing the online components of the game. They'll use methods like Achievements, Paid Map Marketplaces, DLC, and emphasis on Multiplayer PVP features and services to combat piracy. Offline play might not be a big problem, and not a market that they want to capture or restrict.

This "new DRM" version of Starcraft 2 could still be "cracked" if these piracy groups were to create a server emulator that could both authenticate and feed instructions to the client for offline NPC AI gameplay.

However, the pirated version of the game wouldn't be fun, and it would take the crackers several months (maybe even years) create an acceptable AI. And that's even if they had experts in the field of AI programming. At first, they would probably just whip up stationary dummy bots and eventually some rudimentary NPC behavior. There would be no real gameplay or challenge without the real AI.

Even if they could create some intelligent AI behavior, Blizzard could create checks within the game that monitor authentic Blizzard-designed AI behaviors. :) If those checks fail, there should be random effects within the game that don't make it obvious that they're copy protection methods. For example, random crashes. If they don't know there's copy protection, they can't hunt for it.

To make matters even worse for the cracking groups; just don't announce this feature ahead of time. :) Announce that a Persistent Online Connection is required for offline play, and wait for their shock and surprise when they realize the new type of DRM employed.

The biggest downsides to this, are of course, two main points:

It requires a persistent online connection. Something Blizzard is already doing with all of their games now anyways, and you already need to be online (and therefore already have an internet connection) to be authenticated anyways. The first game is a nice stepping stone, and the new DRM could just be marketed as an "Advanced Artificial Intelligence" that's too powerful for home computers. :)

Lag concerns over AI streaming instructions. The thing is, SC2 has a strong emphasis on online multiplayer action, and you're already doing this but with real players. Your offline gameplay would be experiencing the same negligible lag that you experience with other players.. except in this case, there would be much less data being transferred, and you would only be talking to your nearest localized server. So, imagine latency on your best days and that's what you would have for offline sessions.

Crazy idea, but consider it from Blizzard's perspective. Could it force enough pirates to actually buy the game? Are the numbers feasible? Who knows.

It appears that Blizzard might be sick and tired of waiting, especially since players are getting really frustrated and many are now aware of what's really holding back the release.

According to sources here and here, instead of submitting documents describing the RMAH process, they're just going to cut out the real money "cashing-out" part of the Korean version instead. They want to add it later as a patch, if they can obtain approval.

(At first I thought these were just opinion pieces, but they have quotes from Blizzard and a GRB official confirming these new developments.)

Blizzard was contacted on Dec 16 and asked to provide more information about the RMAH. The original hearing for the Korean GRB was slated for Dec 21, but it was cancelled and postponed to a later date. Blizzard was given 7 days to file their additional information.

As I've noted many times in the past, they have to be really careful about what they submit so this doesn't come as a surprise at all. They've been dancing around the issue, and trying to show that "random loot" is the only gambling related activity in the game. However, the RMAH operates just like a slot machine and there is real monetary risk involved. Given only 7 days to prepare information, it was a wise decision to take more time to prepare their best documentation.. they might even rethink the RMAH process for SK specifically.

It appears that Blizzard submitted their amended request and it was received by the GRB on either Dec 21 or most likely Dec 22 (it was reported in the Korean news on Dec 23). However, they're still leaving in the RMAH but for "Battle Coins" (B.Net Bucks) only, so there won't be a way to cash out with real money. It's kind of sneaky, since it's still worth real money.. but it does demonstrate just how important it is to get Korea on board with the RMAH. They could have just cut it out altogether so that it can finally be released for all other geographies.

This is still a re-submission for approval though, and the GRB needs to review their new approach to the RMAH. The new RMAH process still actually involves random chance and possibility of losing money.. unless the Korean RMAH does not charge for Listing Fees. They're expecting to have a final decision made by the first week of January.

Coincidentally, on the day of or right after that resubmission for approval, Bashiok tweeted:

"#Diablo15 year anniversary is in 9 days! (We have a little something fun planned for the week after.) How are you going to celebrate?"

They still haven't received the GRB confirmation though, but it's expected "the week after" Diablo's anniversary.. which is the first week of January. He says "a little something fun planned", meaning that it's not supposed to be anything important like a release date but it's left open for interpretation. Strange that they're not announcing anything on the anniversary date, but rather sometime during the week AFTER. :)

If you weren't aware, Bashiok also confirmed that the GRB rating was indeed a facet responsible for their planned D3 global launch. He wrote the following, and then immediately deleted it, even though there was no reason to delete it except for the GRB comment:

#226 - 2011/12/21 05:37:00 AM

I don't know what translation you're reading but no where has it been stated the release of the game on a whole is delayed because of a GRB rating. Might it delay the game in Korea? I suppose no one knows, but we still have some time since the game is not finished. We're playing internal builds, the entire game, we'd know if it was. I'd know.

I hate it when they try to hide this stuff. I understand why though; players would be really angry if Blizzard did admit to Korea being the reason for long delays.

On Dec 21, I was sitting around waiting all day for Bioware to brag about their "First 24 Hour" sales figures. It's been 4 days now, and still nothing.

Typically for a major AAA release like this that has been so heavily promoted, hyped, and anticipated, other publishers or developers release sales details within a couple days.

I'm not really surprised in this case though. If we do get a sales figure announcement, it will probably be a "First Week" or "First Month" sales. As you already know, when sales are less than expected, companies will often make their first sales announcement the one with the beefiest numbers. Really good sales though will get the "first 24 hours" announcement.

Sometimes companies can cover figures up (or massage them) with special wording to give the impression of more sales than they really are. Here are some examples:

• The most common is "Shipped" rather than "Sold". Companies will announce "Shipped over 4 million copies", but that only means that they shipped unsold copies to retailers for sale. That doesn't mean any of those copies will sell however.
• Using "Registered Users" or "Registered Players" instead of actual sales numbers. "We have over 3 million registered accounts!" which anyone can, in fact, include free registrations, forum user registrations, demo users, and beta players. Plus, any number of other definitions for "Subscribers", "Users", or "Registered Players".
• New forms of Digital Downloads, where players can purchase, download, and install the game months before release. That technically puts the "First 24 Hours" on the first day it was made available, but they include the first couple months as their "First 24 Hours".
• In addition to #3, they'll use the wording "Sold Through As Of". That's more deceptive wording to pay attention to. Why is it "Sold Through" instead of just "Sold"? :)
• They'll disguise the period of sales and geographies sold in. If, for example, the game is launched in NA and then 4 days later in EU, they'll say "First 24 Hours", but they'll include NA, the full 4 days of sales in NA, and then 24 hours in EU. Sometimes they'll even launch a smaller country (with very little sales) last, so that they can include several days of sales from major countries.
• And, of course, when companies are embarrassed to release first day sales, they'll do first week or first month. Even then, they can use options from above to beef up the number even further. :)

Usually it's not a good sign when companies do this. They need to be deceptive to hide real numbers, possibly because it fell short of minimum expectations.

A while ago, I had made some SWTOR Sales Speculations of my own, and I estimated that first day sales would be around 900k (+/- 100k). Professional analysts predicted 1.5 million pre-orders and 3 million total sales within a little over a week after launch. So, many readers here thought I was crazy to estimate so low and many probably questioned my sanity.

After all, there's already been so much hype from Bioware about their figures, that 2-3 million sales was anticipated for the first day of release. Everything pointed to AT LEAST 1.5 million on the first day. And even pre-order numbers were apparently 950,000 two weeks before the launch. Anything less than 1.5 million was inconceivable.

Now, BioWare has recently announced "player figures" though. They're reporting "one million registered players" 3 days after the launch. If this was a normal game, and they had 1 million sales after 3 days, that would mean that first day sales were probably around 600-800k. (There's also a blog entry about it here.)

Bioware is also calling it the "fastest growing subscription MMO in the history of our industry." Meaning the Star Wars MMO industry history, not MMO history. :)

Something really bothers me about their wording and statistics though. Here's what Bioware wrote in their Press Release:

To date, players have:

• Logged 28 million in-game hours – roughly equivalent to watching all six Star Wars movies, two million times
• Averaged well over five hours a day playing the game
• Created more than 3.8 million characters; 510,000 Jedi Knights and 550,000 Sith Warriors
• Killed more than 2 billion non-player characters in the eight days since Early Game Access began

If the average player spends 5 hours per day playing the game, and they have 1 million players, shouldn't that be 15 million in-game hours since "launch" or 50 million in-game hours since the retail game has been live (Early Game Access + 3 days before announcement.) It looks like they're picking and choosing numbers, and jumping back-and-forth between statistics for Early Game Access, first 8 days, first 10 days, and even using Beta player statistics.

It might also have something to do with the recent lock out. There are 1 million registered users, but only a certain number are allowed to play. You can still buy the game and register, but you just can't play the same.. Bioware could still using those "registered" numbers though as vanity figures.

I'm getting the feeling that they won't be releasing sales figures at all.. for good reason too. Apparently, it was a wise idea after all to estimate low. :)

The 2-3 month period should be an interesting one: will there be actual growth or more deceptive press releases?