"I think it is also obvious that people who got the game from these DRM-crackers, and actually did want to play it, would not have ever paid for it."
You expect sales figures yet you say it's "obvious" that people that got the game from DRM crackers would never pay for it? Where are your facts to back this up? Do you really have any proof beyond a blanket statement?
"The developers would have been better off not spending any money whatsoever developing this copy protection. Unless they can provide evidence of a large increase in sales, I call BS. All they did was spend money developing a free game of "crack the DRM" to a bunch of nerds."
Right. We see how well that works. You seem to forget that DRM was created only recently, in response to mass piracy.
You would think that people would take the hint and stop pirating games. If this happened, schemes like DRM would start to disappear because companies would not want to waste the effort or the money.
The next step for game developers is software as a service, which has already started to happen.
You expect sales figures yet you say it's "obvious" that people that got the game from DRM crackers would never pay for it? Where are your facts to back this up? Do you really have any proof beyond a blanket statement?
"The developers would have been better off not spending any money whatsoever developing this copy protection. Unless they can provide evidence of a large increase in sales, I call BS. All they did was spend money developing a free game of "crack the DRM" to a bunch of nerds."
Right. We see how well that works. You seem to forget that DRM was created only recently, in response to mass piracy.
You would think that people would take the hint and stop pirating games. If this happened, schemes like DRM would start to disappear because companies would not want to waste the effort or the money.
The next step for game developers is software as a service, which has already started to happen.