musings on F3 Bethesda interview

bonsai said:
Exactly. "DRM" has been in place for years, but now all of a sudden people are getting their panties in a bunch because pirating is getting worse so more DRM is being put in place. Sensationalism at it's finest.
Click to expand...

Glad to know you're joking, bonsai :D I accept DRM when playing the game isn't stopped by technical issues with "pirate stopping gimmicks". Publishers & Devs need to wake up from this grandeur of delusion about the mindset & philosophy of pirates. It's not working & proving their just as clueless as ever. I'm glad that Bethesda, Valve, & Stardock are considerate to gamers who want no to bare minimum DRM.
 
It's good to see that Bethesda doesn't have any ridiculous notions that going with an aggressive copy protection scheme like SecuROM will help quell zero-day piracy. The news doesn't exactly make me want to rush out and buy a copy on launch day, but it's at least a good thing to see.
 
CrimsonKnight13 said:
Valve... are considerate to gamers who want no to bare minimum DRM.
Click to expand...

So just so I have this straight... you think that having to log in, have an active internet connection, and do a license verification on servers that could potentially be down at anytime, each and every single time you play a game is LESS intrusive than having a 3-5 install limit (with no cd-rom check) that you'll probably never hit anyway? :confused:

Don't get me wrong I use steam like everday, but if you think it's a "bare minimum" DRM system you're crazy.

But hey, it's in fashion to bash DRM so... Down with DRM!!
 
I usually just buy the game, then find a crack (not difficult) and apply it (also not difficult). Win-win for me. If a game can't be made to run the way I want to run it, THEN I wouldn't buy it.
 
bonsai said:
So just so I have this straight... you think that having to log in, have an active internet connection, and do a license verification on servers that could potentially be down at anytime, each and every single time you play a game is LESS intrusive than having a 3-5 install limit (with no cd-rom check) that you'll probably never hit anyway? :confused:

Don't get me wrong I use steam like everday, but if you think it's a "bare minimum" DRM system you're crazy.

But hey, it's in fashion to bash DRM so... Down with DRM!!
Click to expand...

Overall, I've had zero issues with playing games since I've never been out of a net connection, one way or another. I might be a rare case (unsure) but that's why I consider it to not be an issue.

The install limits rarely bother me since I don't reformat or change my hardware enough to warrant a conflict. I own a desktop & laptop, which would mean at most I'd install a game 3 times with 2 Vista & 1 Linux OSes. Most of the time I find ways around such if there are issues. I'm just hoping that FO3 will be an enjoyable experience w/o me being stopped by any DRM when I want to play it. I'm fairly cool headed with PC games in general.
 
bonsai said:
But hey, it's in fashion to bash DRM so... Down with DRM!!
Click to expand...
Realistically, there's no reason why any consumer on the planet would be for DRM, which explains why "DRM bashing" is in fashion. People don't bitch about DRM for shits and giggles ;)
 
phide said:
Realistically, there's no reason why any consumer on the planet would be for DRM, which explains why "DRM bashing" is in fashion. People don't bitch about DRM for shits and giggles ;)
Click to expand...

Yet , oddly enough people don't bitch about CD-ROM checks. Well they do, but not nearly as much. ;)
 
bonsai said:
Yet , oddly enough people don't bitch about CD-ROM checks. Well they do, but not nearly as much. ;)
Click to expand...

That's because iso loaders and excessive hard drive space have become so prevalent that it's a very simple matter to circumvent a CD check even if you're too stupid to find a working crack. Hell a lot of games you can just download a "mini image" that frees you from having to update your crack when patches are released.
 
Krenum said:
You just mentioned 2 console games, we were talking about console to PC contamination, please pay attention. As I stated before The Witcher had a Minigame and it was pure PC. So the argument for minigames being a catalyst for contamination is still null.
Click to expand...

I haven't played Witcher yet. Is the card game intrinsic to game mechanics, such that you can't avoid it, or something you can get involved with on the side to make extra coin (like Pazaak in KOTOR, or the casino in Mass Effect)?
Regardless, even if not a port, console influences can contaminate PC games.
 
Witcher's card game can be avoided totally. My first run through the entire game consisted of everything but the card game. I'll keep it that way, too, when I play the EE version.
 
Ruiner said:
Is the [Witcher] card game intrinsic to game mechanics, such that you can't avoid it?
Click to expand...
It's an element of a side-quest, and an entertaining one at that, not a typical, laborious core game mechanic. In FO3, I'm assuming the minigame is can be bypassed (like in Oblivion), but applicable to every lock in the game. If it can be bypassed, then you can't make the argument that player skill overrides character skill and waters down the RPG element. If it isn't, well, then this is just straight noobly, unwanted console trash :)

The argument that minigames are polluting PC games is a valid one, but we've had our fair share of minigames in PC-only titles too (System Shock 2, anyone?), so it's not exactly clear cut.
 
Ruiner said:
I haven't played Witcher yet. Is the card game intrinsic to game mechanics, such that you can't avoid it, or something you can get involved with on the side to make extra coin (like Pazaak in KOTOR, or the casino in Mass Effect)?
Regardless, even if not a port, console influences can contaminate PC games.
Click to expand...

I agree with you that Mini games can contaminate PC games but they are usually a result of lazyness by the developer substituting for lack of content , "The Witcher"excluded of course, I guess the only way to settle this would be to do some research and find out where minigames originated.
 
bonsai said:
So just so I have this straight... you think that having to log in, have an active internet connection, and do a license verification on servers that could potentially be down at anytime, each and every single time you play a game is LESS intrusive than having a 3-5 install limit (with no cd-rom check) that you'll probably never hit anyway? :confused:

Don't get me wrong I use steam like everday, but if you think it's a "bare minimum" DRM system you're crazy.

But hey, it's in fashion to bash DRM so... Down with DRM!!
Click to expand...

With Steam, you only have to verify the install once, after that you can set Steam to offline mode and not worry about it anymore. My cousin had to do that with Half-Life 2 when we moved his PC and had to wait a week until I could get him plugged into my network. We verified it before moving it, took it upstairs and he played it all week without a hiccup.

With Spore you have all that you just mentioned and it does re verify your account EVERY time you go online with it. So it's got install limits that may or may not release if you uninstall it, a cd check with SecuROM, AND online verification. What if you uninstall it when that server is down? Do you lose recovering that install? What if the online verification has a false positive and your valid key is now black listed?

All of that was removed and a 'clean' version of Spore hit the torrents a week or so BEFORE retail release. So what was all that work for? To screw over valid customers and to prevent selling used PC games. A friend of mine bought Spore but hasn't opened it and just used the pirated version because it didn't flag him as a thief before installing it.
 
It's not causation, but the minigames that come to mind are all cross platform: KOTOR, ME, Bioshock, Farenheit, F3.

SS2's hacking wasn't as annoying as Bioshock's. For one, I don't recall that it was against the clock.
 
I can't recall if they've released a video of the lockpicking mechanic. Have they/

But has everyone forgotten about the hacking system? I think it is actually the best I've ever seen (granted only through videos obviously), and actually makes sense! I applaud Bethesda for creating that system, and hopefully the lockpicking system will be as enjoyable.
 
I love when games have hacking or lock mini-games (like Oblivion & System Shock 2). I'm not too fond of BioShock's & Mass Effect's mini-games though.
 
TheToE! said:
I love games, and yes i've missed out on some good ones. I refuse to support this crap.
Click to expand...

Ahh so you're a masochist.

but seriously, DRM is so insignificant. I have around 80 years on this planet, I'll be damned if I deny myself any enjoyment because of something so miniscule and trite.
 
bonsai said:
Exactly. "DRM" has been in place for years, but now all of a sudden people are getting their panties in a bunch because pirating is getting worse so more DRM is being put in place. Sensationalism at it's finest.
Click to expand...

We are choosing not to support install limits or rootkits, not sure what your bitching about.
 
bonsai said:
So just so I have this straight... you think that having to log in, have an active internet connection, and do a license verification on servers that could potentially be down at anytime, each and every single time you play a game is LESS intrusive than having a 3-5 install limit (with no cd-rom check) that you'll probably never hit anyway? :confused:
Click to expand...

What is it with you people who assume that just because "YOU" are happy with paying full price to rent a game that everyone else should have to put up with that bullshit.

Its incredible how you are so willing to make sweeping generalisations in order to rationalise your point of view. Some people easily hit install limits because of the need to format on a routine basis (I have already formatted my PC twice this year and built an entirely new machine, there goes three installs!!).

So yes, bullshit install limits are VERY INTRUSIVE, particularly for people who are not located in the US and therefore cannot make a local call to the publisher to beg for more activations.

Given that if you have a broadband connection you are online 24/7 anyway, and the fact that server verification is completely seamless, there is absolutely no comparison in terms of convenience in contrast to install limits. I have yet to come across a situation where servers have been down and therefore prevented me from being able to play a game.
 
TheToE! said:
We are choosing not to support install limits or rootkits
Click to expand...

Why only those?

DRM systems like Steam are more intrusive and restrictive. With Spore I never need the CD in the drive and I'll probably never hit the install limit. Yet I have to load and log into Steam each and every single time I want to play a game, and we better pray that the Steam servers don't crash. But yes, lets bitch and whine and pretend the sky is falling because of install limits that 98% of users will never be affected by.
 
bonsai said:
Why only those?

DRM systems like Steam are more intrusive and restrictive. With Spore I never need the CD in the drive and I'll probably never hit the install limit. Yet I have to load and log into Steam each and every single time I want to play a game, and we better pray that the Steam servers don't crash. But yes, lets bitch and whine and pretend the sky is falling because of install limits that 98% of users will never be affected by.
Click to expand...

You are a little PR drone aren't you, Steam is hardly intrusive or restrictive. You can install it on as many machines as you want and it does not require the CD in the drive.

Further and irrespective of the game,s Steam provides so many useful utilities and community features that even if it wasn't a DRM scheme, I would have it running in the background!

And again, you make this baseless assumption that install limits do not affect anyone. Incredible....what ever helps you sleep at night.
 
Diesel_Power said:
Fallout 3 360 version has been leaked onto the internet.
Click to expand...

LOL, if that's true, that's so funny considering all the talk about how bad piracy on the PC is, which is the reason why those developers are prioritizing the console versions, instead of the PC version.

melkore said:
That was fast.

I bet we will hear nothing about piracy on the 360 but if it's pirated early on PC it will be a shit storm all over the internet.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Which is precisely why all this "piracy is destroying PC Gaming" is a bunch of BS. Sure, it's a problem. No one can say otherwise. However, the reasons behind this shift, are obvious and they're not exclusively related with piracy, as was already discussed to death in similar threads.
 
phide said:
More restrictive with its unlimited installation allowance? Hmm?
Click to expand...

More restrictive in that you're required to have a persistent online connection even if you're not accessing online or multi-player content.
 
defiant007 said:
And again, you make this baseless assumption that install limits do not affect anyone.
Click to expand...

EA says that the three-computer limit was designed to address the needs of the largest portion of its user base while still limiting piracy. According to the company's stats, less than 25 percent of its customers across the board activate a PC title on more than one machine -- and the number of EA customers who ask to activate more than three accounts is smaller than one percent.
Click to expand...

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=20218
 
Although I can't agree that Steam is more restrictive than what we've seen (in terms of DRM scheme) in games like Bioshock, it is not the solution for anything, other than being able to download games. I point you to Steam's terms of service. Maybe you won't be so happy with Steam, if you actually read them...
 
bonsai said:
More restrictive in that you're required to have a persistent online connection even if you're not accessing online or multi-player content.
Click to expand...

You DO NOT need an online connection, click on "Go Offline" under the File tab :rolleyes::eek:
 
bonsai said:
More restrictive in that you're required to have a persistent online connection even if you're not accessing online or multi-player content.
Click to expand...
More restrictive, you would say? If you were to ask me, I'd say it's differently restrictive.

bonsai said:
...the number of EA customers who ask to activate more than three accounts is smaller than one percent.
Click to expand...
Do you have any estimation of what percentage of Steam users are negatively affected by the active internet connection requirement (not persistent in offline mode)?
 
defiant007 said:
Yeah as if I am going to believe anything that EA has to say on the subject.
Click to expand...

Well at least I have some evidence to support my position, all you have is your opinion.

For the record I rebuild and format my PC all the time, but guess what? It's still a non-issue. Mountains out of molehills and all that.
 
bonsai said:
Well at least I have some evidence to support my position, all you have is your opinion.

For the record I rebuild and format my PC all the time, but guess what? It's still a non-issue. Mountains out of molehills and all that.
Click to expand...

Your evidence isn't worth shit, what a surprise that EA is dreaming up statistics to support a DRM scheme being implemented on their software. Of course they're going to say it doesn't affect anyone, just like MS stated that RROD was within ordinary statistical failure rates :rolleyes:

Well you obviously do not rebuild and reformat very often, otherwise it would be an issue :rolleyes:
 
defiant007 said:
Your evidence isn't worth shit
Click to expand...

That may be but it's still worth more than yours.

Well you obviously do not rebuild and reformat very often, otherwise it would be an issue :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

It's not an issue because how often are you going to be playing a game after 1.5 years (assuming a rebuild every 6 months) anyway? There are only a handful of games that I frequently replay and even those are 2 or 3 times at most. With an install limit of 5, with auto renewing licenses, and even if there is a problem I can make one phone call to fix it. Yeah, it's a non-issue. You may play your games for years and years, and reinstall them over and over again, that's fine... you fall in the 1%.

May be interested in this too: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...-drm-to-the-testwith-a-surprising-result.html

in fact we surpassed the install limit by a few times before running into an issue.
Click to expand...

But please lets not add anymore actual logic to this argument.
 
Is it just me or does every single PC game thread have an all out rant session about DRM? It's getting old fast, even if the gaming news stories are bursting with piracy blame.

Stop resurrecting the damn horse, only to beat it to death again!
 
CrimsonKnight13 said:
Is it just me or does every single PC game thread have an all out rant session about DRM? It's getting old fast, even if the gaming news stories are bursting with piracy blame.

Stop resurrecting the damn horse, only to beat it to death again!
Click to expand...

Its understandable, but sadly it has come to a point that gamers' pre-purchase questions aren't limited to "Will my PC run it?" or "Do you think it will live up to the hype", but instead they have to worry about "How much DRM will it have?"

Things get even worse when game developers start railing on piracy as the scapegoat for when their multimillion dollar project doesn't get the sales figures the marketing department promised.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top