Draconian DRM

[pieguy259]

Stardock has a good anti-piracy system. You can play the game without a serial number, pirate as you wish - HOWEVER, pirated copies cannot receive updates.

---

PanGalactic Travel Company | PanGal Feedback | PanGal Recruitment

[McNeo]

I dislike DRM. The entire reason I purchase things in their hard copy form is because I like having the game in hand to play as I wish.
Reasonable anti-piracy methods such as the use of serial keys are fine.
Its understandable that companies would want to protect their investments.

But it shouldn't be the way that EA are going with it.

Then again, what can you do? The relationship between global firms such as EA, who acquire some of the most notable game developers, and the consumer, is one of having to sacrifice the experience of a genuinely decent game to protest against the implementation of questionable policies. How many are willing to make that sacrifice? Not enough to make a difference.

Also, I bought my first game digitally over the weekend, supreme commander 2. I wish it was in the shops where I am, if only for the merchandise that comes with the game itself (ie, the game manual). I do like a handbook briefly describing each unit/upgrade/weapon/character in a game.

Its also worth noting that the Freelancer game manual is written as a part of the game rather than an as a manual existing outside of the game itself.

EDIT: Having now read the OP, I have to say that I find the idea of games that require you to be online all the time, even when you're offline, as taking the concept of DRM way too far. The DoS attacks and so on aside, its simply a complete hassle, and means that the companies take away your right to play the game when you want to, as long as you have a computer and the relevant input controls. This is quite bad for paying customers, as it means they cannot play the game that they paid for, when they want to. Not everywhere in the world has an internet connection. Even requiring a connection every program start is taking this concept too far, in my opinion.

Stardock has a good way of doing it, denying updates to customers who do not pay, but I think the best compromise lies in systems such as steam. Even though my experience with steam is limited so far, I had good bandwidth downloading my first game and no real problems with updates at all. Im always concerned about something running in the background taking up system resources while I play a heavily demanding game, but as I said, it is acceptable.

Thankyou for the little tidbit about Assassins Creed 2, which I shall now probably not buy since I:

1. Heard mixed reviews about it.
2. Dislike the invasive DRM described.

What a shame, since I enjoyed Assassins Creed 1. Reminded me of those fight scenes in movies, where the protagonist is surrounded by enemies, but only one or two face him or her at a time. Haha.

[Canadianguy]

I dont understand why they use DRM. Its not actually that good financialy for them.

Yes it reduces piracy, but usually, those who would have torrented a game will still not buy it if torrenting is not possible.

And its annoying as hell for the end-user.

---

[kingvaillant]

This is just a way for them to make money on a short to mid term basis.

However, since they express no trust for the costumers, the opposite will also happen. Costumers will be less inclined to encourage a company that does not respect them and their rights of having a control over an acquired and fully paid item, per say.

Such DRM with the company's ability to cancel an account is extremely draconian. It would be like buying a car full cash, then having the dealership come back to you and take the car, even if you fully paid for it and owe nothing to them anymore. The costumer will think twice before dealing with the dealership to get a car. Instead, he will try to find an other seller to get his model (which in our case would be the equivalent of acquiring an illegal copy of the game).

In the long term, those company will suffer of their decisions. Loosing many clients and getting compelled into the judiciary machine, they may have to change their psychology and approach.

As some said, Spore was one of the first to come with a draconian DRM allowing three installations. Not quite useful for someone like me who has 3 computers and does a complete reinstall on them every 1 1/2 year...

As Yuri said, so far only Steam is reasonable. Although it is unable to offer its service offline. Gotta live with it I guess.

Or a good alternative. a DRM that requires the persons to log on to launch the game (a bit like older DRM system which needed the CD to launch) or, if the person cannot log, let the game be started three times before being forced to connect online again to reacquire the ability to boot offline again. So, you'd be able to play at school during a break, once home you log on, it refills, and voila, you can play again.

If AC2 is going to be DRM protected... I may not be inclined to buy it myself, but again, this depends on how draconian it is.

---

Director of the Liberty Security Force: Fidelity, Bravery and Integrity

The Amundsen Zone-21 Restrictions

[Magoo!]

Well, while this grave is dug;

They said the same about Spore. I am one of sixteen fans on the earth right now, but the fact of the matter is that it works fine.

[Treewyrm]

A while back I was thinking of playing Mass Effect, just to replay it to remind myself of the story and details before I get to play the sequel. Turns out I used all three installations. First I had used installation back at Windows XP, then I installed Windows 7 public RC and there goes another installation, and third one I have probably used on laptop. EA support turned out to be a waste of time - bouncing me from one manager to another, although it was said they'd reset installation count instantly if you needed. Running out of patience all I was left to is to use crack and that's it - no hassle, and no need to continue testing my patience with their tech support. Does limiting installation works fine? I say not.

Assassin's Creed 2 DRM? It works. Really...

[ivr56]

Sure Does!
Servers were DoS attacked again today.

---

[mwerte]

---