New Games Require Online Validation Every 10 Days?

Status
Not open for further replies.
brucedeluxe169 said:
quoted for the hilarious comedic gold contained within :)

anyway, dont most MP3 players restrict copying songs back from the player once they are loaded? OMG, they are treating *me* like a criminal! what about stores that have video cameras inside-and outside the establishment? gee... they are filming me, they are treating *me* like a criminal! why do cars have locks on them? damn people for thinking *i'm* a criminal! When I load up steam so I can play a half life episode.... wtf valve, stop treating *me* like a criminal!

:rolleyes: these measures are to stop, or at least impede the real criminals, *not* everyone else.... seriously how can you people get it so wrong.....
Click to expand...

Whiny? Hardly. This is seriously bothersome, an unwelcome trend.

Overall PUNISHMENT DOES NOT WORK in the end, it ends up having the opposite affect from what was intended.

You try to slap on copy protection then MORE people will copy it rather than buy it because it annoys them. The worse the protection gets, the more people will be bothered, the more people will be pushed over the edge and find a patch to get rid of the annoyance.

We like freedom, if we buy something, we want to do with it as we please, it's ours, to hell with some bogus "license" that we never actually agreed to even if there is some stupid "by pressing this button you agree..."

NO. I do not agree, I'm just pressing this stupid button because if I don't, I can't play MY game that I BOUGHT. I don't agree to jack.

Just because something doesn't bother you it doesn't mean that it might not be a big deal to somebody else. Maybe somebody doesn't care if their rights (and I don't only mean "constitutional" rights) are snipped away slowly one by one, until their pathetic ass finds itself in some Orweillian nightmarish future ~ but - I see more and more people wearing T-shirts that say things like "Speak up, while you still can" recently.
 
My personal hesitation is not about activating the game every so often. Its about the fact that the roll-out will/could be a disaster and I'll be attempting to be a good consumer, but will end up getting shafted by poor implementation and execution.

I also agree with bholstege, it assumes a lot that you always have an internet connection too.
 
gibber said:
Whiny? Hardly. This is seriously bothersome, an unwelcome trend.

Overall PUNISHMENT DOES NOT WORK in the end, it ends up having the opposite affect from what was intended.

You try to slap on copy protection then MORE people will copy it rather than buy it because it annoys them. The worse the protection gets, the more people will be bothered, the more people will be pushed over the edge and find a patch to get rid of the annoyance.

We like freedom, if we buy something, we want to do with it as we please, it's ours, to hell with some bogus "license" that we never actually agreed to even if there is some stupid "by pressing this button you agree..."

NO. I do not agree, I'm just pressing this stupid button because if I don't, I can't play MY game that I BOUGHT. I don't agree to jack.

Just because something doesn't bother you it doesn't mean that it might not be a big deal to somebody else. Maybe somebody doesn't care if their rights (and I don't only mean "constitutional" rights) are snipped away slowly one by one, until their pathetic ass finds itself in some Orweillian nightmarish future ~ but - I see more and more people wearing T-shirts that say things like "Speak up, while you still can" recently.
Click to expand...

there is no punishment... the game silently checks up with a remote server every 10 days... seriously, there is NO hassle at all.....

yea this has been argued over countless times before..... even if you dont agree with it.... with most software you buy, you really only buy the license to use it.... sorry if thats not what you like..... thats how it is. dont like it? simply don't buy it. if that means not buying any games at all, then i dont think you should have a problem with that. nobody is *entitled* to play a game or use a certain piece of software, and if these "privacy" issues are such a big deal to you, then you should be *happy* to not be supporting such evil companies that have the gall to put small theft prevention checks on the software ....
 
Wouldn't it be great to go to a LAN party that doesn't have the internet, and then to find out that you don't get to play because you can't verify its legit? Then the realization that you're the only moron in the room who actually bought it. Piracy hasn't and never will be stopped, or even remotely dented by using the tactics they are. The ability to play games online is a huge reason most gamers buy a game more than just for single player.

I wouldn't buy these games either, just for the principle of it. I think far more legitimate customers are lost that way. The people who would pirate it, already will pirate it, and it will work great for them. People willing to pay are the ones who really pay :\.
 
If the game was just phoning home every couple weeks I would have no problems with it. SecureRom however will not be getting on my system. I will still buy the game but something, a certain .exe, may mysteriously vanish when installing the game...
 
And when this company goes out of business or feels they no longer wish to support the online copy protection your hard earned money spent on this game is gone.
The DRM'ed music files of the failed music stores is a perfet example of what will happen. When will the consumers just stop buying this crap?
 
I think it sucks, but the average Joe hasn't got a clue about what is going on. All they know is they have to have an internet connection to play the game. Does it suck? Yep! I'll still buy it since I want to play Spore and I think the people who coded it deserve to make some money off of it. Pirates suck.
 
isn't the whole point of spore that when you play the planet and other planets are populated by the creations of other players and streamed in real time?

kinda hard to pirate that....
 
All this will do is ensure that when the game drops that whoever cracks it first will be lauded over as the saviour. And for most pirates that design cracks for games that is the main reason that they do it. Attention and recognition. Thus, EA has ensured an immortal shrine for the cracker that can break it first.

Of course, I haven't purchased nor played an EA game in many years as I see their idea of a "game" as being complete shit. So I won't even bother to download the torrent or crack. Thus they have ensured that 1 person won't be pirating their wares. Now Bioware back in the day I used to purchase EVERTHING that they put out until I started play WoW. But since they have decided to join forces with EA, then I can skip all of their releases and try out some different.

Oblivion has 0 copyright protection and did just fine. The only thing this draconian copyright protection is meant to do is to give the extra lawyers and bullshitters at EA a reason to have a job. Kinda neat I suppose to be able to make up a job description and actually get it passed through the higher ups. "Entry level consumer alienater wanted" Must be able to screw over the general public and spin it to sound good.

Last point that noboby seems to be mentioning is that what happens if you authnticate and joeschmo hacker has your CD Key autogenerated with a key generator? Before it was a simple matter of buy the game, install it, cd key check, happy consumer! Now it will be buy the game, cd key authentication, happy consumer, hacker generates your key, 10 days later you can't play and have to mail the receipt, gamebox to EA, to prove that you bought the game, and wait up to 6 weeks to get confirmation back. And if you don't have the receipt... Then buy another license for $60.

To reiterate, thank you EA and Bioware for shortening my "Games to get" list for my new 9800 GTX.

And Take 2.... Please never sell out to them... PLEASE!

Cagey
 
brucedeluxe169 said:
yea... a car is a bit harder to "pirate" than a bunch of 0's and 1's :rolleyes:

and yea, just conveniently ignore the examples i posted...
Click to expand...

Really? I am sure there are more car theives than hackers.

Why do I need to respond to each of your rediculous examples. I wouldn't buy one of those MP3 players either.
 
brucedeluxe169 said:
there is no punishment... the game silently checks up with a remote server every 10 days... seriously, there is NO hassle at all.....
Click to expand...

I agree with some of what you say, sorta.

There are obvious measures in place, in the real world, to prevent unlawful or malicious activity; even at the user level. However, the way that software and media firms have been handling privacy, protection and user confidence does not quite equate to the same "prevention" mechanism.

Every single time some new mechanism, to stop piracy, is implemented it gets cracked.

Every single time some new mechanism, to stop piracy, is implemented it increases the chance that the end user-- the legit end user-- will have technical or user difficulty.

Every single time some new mechanism, to stop piracy, is implemented it increase the personal security-risk surface area.

Plan and simple, these guys and gals have the tools available to maintain their data in better ways. They don't. I have no idea why, but they're careless--how many times have you heard of serious penalty befalling any of the (now hundreds) of idiots who lose a laptop with thousands or millions of identities.

Is there any reason to think game publishers really do their effort to retain user data any better? If they did a better job at maintaining the data on their end, than there would be no need to track the product on the user's end; ergo, no more "Call Home" schemes.



Anyway, I'm a bit pissed about the two titles in question: I was looking forward to getting a "crack" at them, legitimately. Sure, games I own have secureROM and other dissimilar mechanisms, but this is a little ridiculous. And, I'm not quite sure I want to encourage more of this behavior.
 
This whole idea is ludicrous; no one wants to have to revalidate their installation every 10 days. Why not just do it the way other companies already do it: leave single player alone for the most part and check CD-Keys during online play? It works thus far, so why are we in need new technology that will waste the consumer's time? And that's not to mention the fact that it will be useless in preventing piracy.

This "innovation" will only serve to alienate their consumer base.
 
Actually, what I should have said and want to say:


Doesn't a rookit have a VERY similar behavior?
 
when you try to stop someone from doing something, it has a positive and negative reaction. same thing goes for drugs, legalize them and youll have less people in jail, put tax dollors toward something more useful.
 
And that is why I didn't buy "Bioshock" I played the demo enjoyed it until I found out they installed their copy protection in the flippin demo and then refused to buy the game. This kind of copy protection is getting out of hand. They expect us to put up with CD keys, Online Validation, Root Kits and now Re-occuring Validation - and that all in one game. Forget it! They lost a BioShock sale already. Now they lose more sales to me, I refuse to be treated like a criminal for purchasing software.

There are plenty of other games out there, If I have to mark a few off my list because of tyranical copy protection schemes so be it.
 
BombermanX said:
This whole idea is ludicrous; no one wants to have to revalidate their installation every 10 days. Why not just do it the way other companies already do it: leave single player alone for the most part and check CD-Keys during online play? It works thus far, so why are we in need new technology that will waste the consumer's time? And that's not to mention the fact that it will be useless in preventing piracy.

This "innovation" will only serve to alienate their consumer base.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much.

This method works pretty well, in my experience. So why go out and bring out another method that employs more draconian measures?
 
jjager85 said:
when you try to stop someone from doing something, it has a positive and negative reaction. same thing goes for drugs, legalize them and youll have less people in jail, put tax dollors toward something more useful.
Click to expand...

Plus have tax dollars to get people off drugs. It is a win-win situation. Less money spent keeping drug users in jail and money for drug rehab/education.
 
brucedeluxe169 said:
there is no punishment... the game silently checks up with a remote server every 10 days... seriously, there is NO hassle at all.....

yea this has been argued over countless times before..... even if you dont agree with it.... with most software you buy, you really only buy the license to use it.... sorry if thats not what you like..... thats how it is. dont like it? simply don't buy it. if that means not buying any games at all, then i dont think you should have a problem with that. nobody is *entitled* to play a game or use a certain piece of software, and if these "privacy" issues are such a big deal to you, then you should be *happy* to not be supporting such evil companies that have the gall to put small theft prevention checks on the software ....
Click to expand...

The problem is you assume it will all work fine and there will be no problems with implementation. Looking back however the different copyright schemes out there DO cause problems for people. Maybe not for a majority of people but they have caused problems in the past and people hate it because of that. It is looked on as punishment because I, a paying customer, has to jump thru hoops to get a program I bought to run, while someone else pirates it and downloads a crack and never has a problem again.
I get punished not him.

As for your mp3 player example, I have never and will never buy an mp3 player that does that.
 
I pretty much knew this topic was going to cause issues with people skirting the rules. Goodbye!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top