Mass Effect and Spore to use new Securom copy protection - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Destrox · 05-08-2008, 04:43 PM

I must agree with the idea that DRM != protection for any dollar value of sales.

Publisher spends a boat-load of cash for the latest copy protection.

Such copy protection is well documented to have issues with certain hardware combinations, and other critical flaws that cause the game to not even run.

Who is hurt by this? The legit end user.

As a end user, if you buy a product that does not work. You should be able to get your money back... well not with PC games. No way, no how anymore.

So you are now left with a 60$ game that will not run on your computer. The publisher will attempt half-assed tech support that in the end usually frustrates the end user even more. Often to the point of giving up.

This leaves the end user in a situation, they paid good money for a product that does not work and will not be able to return it due to anti-piracy policies.

These dirty pirates that the Publishers (Might I add it is VERY COMMON that it is indeed the PUBLISHER not the DEVELOPER who adds Copy Protection.) are trying to deter are sitting back in their basements playing the very game with zero hassle because it was cracked days ago.

What happens now? That same one-time legit end user may never buy a game again from that publisher and will say "Fuck it" and download it and quite possibly many other games they never knew were available to download.

I've been playing games for many years, and have seen so many countless individuals have games be non-functioning because of Copy Protection. PC games have it bad enough with software/hardware compatibilities as it is, they do not need copy protection that is being given more and more low level protections to step in and increase the chance of things going bad.

Has Copy Protection made it any harder for a pirate to attain a game (A game that they never were going to purchase in the first place...) and cause them to say "Well this is too much hassle, I'll just go buy it instead." ? Hell no.

While it use to be far easier to attain such things, its still *VERY* easy to do so to this day.

I've yet to see a good reason as to why these games need copy protection. What we need are stiffer laws that fight against piracy, software based methods do not do shit.

Also as a side note, I would like to say that thanks to piracy, I have bought many ( As in 20+) games that I never would have even bothered with without trying it out first.

Demos are hard to come by anymore, and quite often they are far from the end product.

So copy protection has made some of my games non-functioning and caused me to *NEVER* buy ones with it installed. (Not all, just certain types), and piracy has actually caused me to PURCHASE games that I never would have bought in the first place.

Interesting no?

xepherys · 05-08-2008, 04:59 PM

Destrox,

I'm in the same boat. I've downloaded games, decided I liked them and gone to the store to buy them. I don't really have any desire to pay $40-60 for a shitty game. I DO, however, have a great desire to support developers that make good games.

Destrox · 05-08-2008, 05:20 PM

Ah this is another forum talking about the exact same thing with pretty much a lot of our exact points:

http://neowin.net/news/gamers/08/05/...-days#comments

Lokus · 05-09-2008, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

This isn't as simple as pirating video or audio, though. You won't be able to get around this with a simple download of a p2p or mininova. I've seen Blizzard take on hackers on Bnet and win time and time again. I think you're assuming a lot in thinking that pirates will crack it and suddenly all pirates will have access.

It is that easy though. Every game gets cracked and it's put on the net. All you have to do is download it and replace the executable with a crack which probably comes with the download. If not, there are sites dedicated solely to cracks. Bnet is different because you have to log in to play because it's multiplayer. Mass Effect and Spore are both single player, although Spore does have some multiplayer components.

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

There's no evidence to suggest that this DRM will effect playability.

A lot of this seems too premature. So premature, in fact, that it strikes me as pretense.

This argument is still about wanting piracy to be easier.

It probably won't affect playability like FADE did. From what I heard, FADE did a good job actually of deterring pirates (due to its difficulty in cracking) with relatively few genuine customers getting hit by it.

To me, this just comes down to the attitude of the companies that it's ok to hurt their legitimate customers in their fight against piracy. It doesn't deter pirates and some of the pirates who do get put off by it, would not have bought the game no matter what.

I might get it if they add it to Steam. Steam does DRM right, you download it and it authenticates once then you can play forever if you want, offline or online. If your HD gets fried, it's no problem, you just log back on to your Steam account and it starts downloading your games again. Can't say I'm surprised though that EA would ignore this digital distribution option and spring for some overly involved Securom DRM.

Esoteric · 05-09-2008, 11:12 AM

Quote:

BioWare Backs Down From Draconian Mass Effect Authentication

When Mass Effect comes to the computer it will not use SecuROM which require 10-day periodic re-authetication and instead will rely on a one-time online authentication, Bioware announced today.

The developer said the decision came after listing "very closely" to its fans and that the new system will also allow gamers to play the game without the DVD in the drive.

The system will allow gamers to authenticate their game on just three computers, but EA does have the ability to give additional authorizations if they are warranted.

Hit up the jump for the official FAQ and to let us know what you think about this change of heart.

Q: What is the difference between the old PC disc authentication solution and the new online model?

A: Two things have changed:

• First, authentication of discs has now gone from the physical format to the online format, freeing the need for consumers to have a disc in the drive at all times.

• Second, with online authentication consumers now connect to the Internet the first time the game is launched and are required only to reconnect if they are downloading new game content.

Q: Will EA or BioWare take any personal information from my computer during an authentication?

A: Absolutely not. We do not take any personal information from your computer. The system simply verifies that a valid CD key has been provided and assigns that activation to that PC.

Q: What happens when I’ve reached the maximum # of computers for my game and I need more, say due to theft of computer, computer crashes, etc?

A: EA customer service is on hand to supply any additional authorizations that are warranted. This will be done on a case-by-case basis by contacting customer support.

Q: Why are BioWare and EA implementing this new authentication process?

A: This serves to protect our software from piracy. It has the added benefit of allowing consumers to activate the game on multiple machines without needing the DVD in the drive when playing the game.

Q: Did BioWare and EA change their mind on requiring that the game be re-authorized every 10 days?

A: BioWare has always listened very closely to its fans and we made this decision to ensure we are delivering the best possible experience to them. To all the fans including our many friends in the armed services and internationally who expressed concerns that they would not be able re-authenticate as often as required, EA and BioWare want you to know that your feedback is important to us.

Q: If the game isn’t going to require an authentication every 10 days, will it ever require re-authentication?

A: Only if the player chooses to download new game content.

Looks like BioWare changed their mind.

Lokus · 05-09-2008, 01:26 PM

Cool! I'm glad to see bitching on forums really does accomplish something after all.

CyCo PL · 05-09-2008, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoganSnake

No, with a crack, it won't even ask once.

Then what's the problem? Buy the game, install the crack, and be done with it. I've done that with plenty of games that I legally own but don't want to dig up the disc every time I play. I was under the impression that you couldn't crack it because of the check every 10 days (which they recently backpedaled on).

If it's that easily cracked, I don't see what the big deal is.

(edit: I read the rest of the post after replying and realized that it's already been established that Bioware went back on the 10-day check, so forgive me for stating what's already been stated.)

Shauk · 05-09-2008, 06:29 PM

Destrox · 05-09-2008, 06:59 PM

Very cool news, I'd still love to see the actual studies and proof that it is cost effective for them to use it.

xepherys · 06-13-2008, 06:15 PM

Will, I don't really understand your "making piracy easier" observation. Let's get a real-world, material version of this. Let's say... murder.

Side A: Pro-DRM:

Sure, an OCCASIONAL innocent person is killed, but it "deters" criminals from violent crime. The vast majority of the populace is not affected at all.

Side B: Anti-DRM:

Even an occasional innocent being killed is not acceptable policy. Besides, capital punishment does NOT eliminate violent crime.

At least that's the comparison I see...

Baraka_Guru · 06-13-2008, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xepherys

Let's get a real-world, material version of this. Let's say... murder.

What?

First of all, software piracy and DRM is a real-world, material version. Either way, your observation doesn't quite work.

Okay, so DRM doesn't really work. Fine. So what next?

The Canadian government has recently tabled a new copyright bill. While it's still rough around the edges, it's a step into the right direction: it puts restrictions on the penalizations to end users. Instead of a maximum of $20,000 per illegal item, it's $500 per infraction.

Another step into the right direction is that they explicitly states that ISPs abide by the notice-and-notice system when illegal content is transferred.

It also imposes stiff penalties to those who upload illegal content (ie. the "real" pirates).

The only big problem is the blanket prohibition on circumvention of protections, which is related to this thread and Securom. For example, even if you are a legal owner of the software, it is illegal for your to break the security if something goes wrong with your attempts to unlock it. Hrm.

Generally, you can have as many copies of your legally owned material as you want on your devices, so long as you own said devices.

Anyway, I think this would help target pirate activity if it could be enforced (which it can't, really), but it's a step in the right direction. This issue has been sitting around with no legal updates for over 10 years.

Martian · 06-14-2008, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru

The only big problem is the blanket prohibition on circumvention of protections, which is related to this thread and Securom. For example, even if you are a legal owner of the software, it is illegal for your to break the security if something goes wrong with your attempts to unlock it. Hrm.

.

That's not even close to the only thing wrong with the new legislation, although it's a big part of it.

That's another rant though, I guess.

Reese · 06-14-2008, 06:25 AM

Will, Almost every new form of copy protection has caused more burden to the buyer than it has to the pirate. CD Checks basically require me to keep a stack of 10 CDs on my computer and another 20-30 CDs readily handy on a shelf within arms reach.

I can't tell you how many games I've trashed because I lost the CD key to them or in the case of Diablo 2 the ink just rubbed off the sticker.. I swear I have at least 4 copies of Diablo 2 but I only have 1 CD key because the ink smears easily.

Half-life 2 required online authorization to play it offline. Not only this, but once you authorized it required you to download the 100+mb patch. Being on crappy dialup at the time meant I spend about 6 hours downloading a patch that fixed 1-2 bugs I probably never would have noticed in the first place. It was absolutely the the worst gaming experience of my life. It very negatively influenced my opinion of the game and the developer. I refuse to have Steam installed on my system.

These are of course slightly older examples because I've almost completely migrated away from PC gaming and more toward consoles. I'm glad to see Mass Effect dumped the every 13 days re-authentication deal and hopefully Spore does too as it'll probably be the only PC game I buy for a very long time.

xepherys · 06-14-2008, 06:55 AM

Baraka,

DRM isn't material; Nor is copyright material. They are legal jargon, words on paper or spoken. Material crime is far more intimate with most people. Violent crime, robbery/theft, embezzlement, etc. Trying to crossover a law based on non-material objects into the material doesn't work. To me, that means the laws don't make sense. Am I not explaining this well?

The point is that, a) it's not terribly enforceable as there is limited evidence left behind during most "crimes" regarding DRM.

b) The rules are sticky and not well explained. Actually, with software you usually CANNOT have as many copies as you want on devices you own. Many pieces of software allow ONE install on ONE system (windows is the best example, but there are others). And you can almost never copy the disc, by way of the EULA.

c) It's the marriage of everything, DRM, copy protection and EULA that makes it a nightmare for legit end-users. I'd bet that many end-users, simply out of lack of understanding, violate the EULA more often than not.

At any rate, the defense against Willravel's comment is akin to this... If you COPY your gaming disc, using something that defeats the copy protection, you are in violation of the law (DMCA, I believe... at least). I don't want to hear about "making piracy easier"... I want to hear about "Not being assholes to your end-users".

05-08-2008, 04:43 PM	#41 (permalink)
Destrox Metal and Rock 4 Life Location: Phoenix	I must agree with the idea that DRM != protection for any dollar value of sales. Publisher spends a boat-load of cash for the latest copy protection. Such copy protection is well documented to have issues with certain hardware combinations, and other critical flaws that cause the game to not even run. Who is hurt by this? The legit end user. As a end user, if you buy a product that does not work. You should be able to get your money back... well not with PC games. No way, no how anymore. So you are now left with a 60$ game that will not run on your computer. The publisher will attempt half-assed tech support that in the end usually frustrates the end user even more. Often to the point of giving up. This leaves the end user in a situation, they paid good money for a product that does not work and will not be able to return it due to anti-piracy policies. These dirty pirates that the Publishers (Might I add it is VERY COMMON that it is indeed the PUBLISHER not the DEVELOPER who adds Copy Protection.) are trying to deter are sitting back in their basements playing the very game with zero hassle because it was cracked days ago. What happens now? That same one-time legit end user may never buy a game again from that publisher and will say "Fuck it" and download it and quite possibly many other games they never knew were available to download. I've been playing games for many years, and have seen so many countless individuals have games be non-functioning because of Copy Protection. PC games have it bad enough with software/hardware compatibilities as it is, they do not need copy protection that is being given more and more low level protections to step in and increase the chance of things going bad. Has Copy Protection made it any harder for a pirate to attain a game (A game that they never were going to purchase in the first place...) and cause them to say "Well this is too much hassle, I'll just go buy it instead." ? Hell no. While it use to be far easier to attain such things, its still VERY easy to do so to this day. I've yet to see a good reason as to why these games need copy protection. What we need are stiffer laws that fight against piracy, software based methods do not do shit. Also as a side note, I would like to say that thanks to piracy, I have bought many ( As in 20+) games that I never would have even bothered with without trying it out first. Demos are hard to come by anymore, and quite often they are far from the end product. So copy protection has made some of my games non-functioning and caused me to NEVER buy ones with it installed. (Not all, just certain types), and piracy has actually caused me to PURCHASE games that I never would have bought in the first place. Interesting no? __________________ You bore me.... next.

05-08-2008, 04:59 PM	#42 (permalink)
xepherys <3 TFP Location: 17TLH2445607250	Destrox, I'm in the same boat. I've downloaded games, decided I liked them and gone to the store to buy them. I don't really have any desire to pay $40-60 for a shitty game. I DO, however, have a great desire to support developers that make good games. __________________ The prospect of achieving a peace agreement with the extremist group of MILF is almost impossible... -- Emmanuel Pinol, Governor of Cotobato My Homepage

05-08-2008, 05:20 PM	#43 (permalink)
Destrox Metal and Rock 4 Life Location: Phoenix	Ah this is another forum talking about the exact same thing with pretty much a lot of our exact points: http://neowin.net/news/gamers/08/05/...-days#comments __________________ You bore me.... next.

05-09-2008, 01:26 PM	#46 (permalink)
Lokus I can't think of a good title Location: East Bay Area, CA	Cool! I'm glad to see bitching on forums really does accomplish something after all. __________________ The black wind howls...

05-09-2008, 06:29 PM	#48 (permalink)
Shauk Confused Adult Location: Spokane, WA	Last edited by Shauk; 06-13-2008 at 06:25 PM..

05-09-2008, 06:59 PM	#49 (permalink)
Destrox Metal and Rock 4 Life Location: Phoenix	Very cool news, I'd still love to see the actual studies and proof that it is cost effective for them to use it. __________________ You bore me.... next.

06-13-2008, 06:15 PM	#50 (permalink)
xepherys <3 TFP Location: 17TLH2445607250	Will, I don't really understand your "making piracy easier" observation. Let's get a real-world, material version of this. Let's say... murder. Side A: Pro-DRM: Sure, an OCCASIONAL innocent person is killed, but it "deters" criminals from violent crime. The vast majority of the populace is not affected at all. Side B: Anti-DRM: Even an occasional innocent being killed is not acceptable policy. Besides, capital punishment does NOT eliminate violent crime. At least that's the comparison I see... __________________ The prospect of achieving a peace agreement with the extremist group of MILF is almost impossible... -- Emmanuel Pinol, Governor of Cotobato My Homepage

06-14-2008, 06:25 AM	#53 (permalink)
Reese Delicious	Will, Almost every new form of copy protection has caused more burden to the buyer than it has to the pirate. CD Checks basically require me to keep a stack of 10 CDs on my computer and another 20-30 CDs readily handy on a shelf within arms reach. I can't tell you how many games I've trashed because I lost the CD key to them or in the case of Diablo 2 the ink just rubbed off the sticker.. I swear I have at least 4 copies of Diablo 2 but I only have 1 CD key because the ink smears easily. Half-life 2 required online authorization to play it offline. Not only this, but once you authorized it required you to download the 100+mb patch. Being on crappy dialup at the time meant I spend about 6 hours downloading a patch that fixed 1-2 bugs I probably never would have noticed in the first place. It was absolutely the the worst gaming experience of my life. It very negatively influenced my opinion of the game and the developer. I refuse to have Steam installed on my system. These are of course slightly older examples because I've almost completely migrated away from PC gaming and more toward consoles. I'm glad to see Mass Effect dumped the every 13 days re-authentication deal and hopefully Spore does too as it'll probably be the only PC game I buy for a very long time. __________________ “It is better to be rich and healthy than poor and sick” - Dave Barry

06-14-2008, 06:55 AM	#54 (permalink)
xepherys <3 TFP Location: 17TLH2445607250	Baraka, DRM isn't material; Nor is copyright material. They are legal jargon, words on paper or spoken. Material crime is far more intimate with most people. Violent crime, robbery/theft, embezzlement, etc. Trying to crossover a law based on non-material objects into the material doesn't work. To me, that means the laws don't make sense. Am I not explaining this well? The point is that, a) it's not terribly enforceable as there is limited evidence left behind during most "crimes" regarding DRM. b) The rules are sticky and not well explained. Actually, with software you usually CANNOT have as many copies as you want on devices you own. Many pieces of software allow ONE install on ONE system (windows is the best example, but there are others). And you can almost never copy the disc, by way of the EULA. c) It's the marriage of everything, DRM, copy protection and EULA that makes it a nightmare for legit end-users. I'd bet that many end-users, simply out of lack of understanding, violate the EULA more often than not. At any rate, the defense against Willravel's comment is akin to this... If you COPY your gaming disc, using something that defeats the copy protection, you are in violation of the law (DMCA, I believe... at least). I don't want to hear about "making piracy easier"... I want to hear about "Not being assholes to your end-users". __________________ The prospect of achieving a peace agreement with the extremist group of MILF is almost impossible... -- Emmanuel Pinol, Governor of Cotobato My Homepage