480 réponses à ce sujet

[Felfenix]

Cause the pirates aren't bluffing.

[Marionetten]

It's getting increasingly difficult to justify keeping my pre-order.



... Can we get some good news for once, please?

[Yrkoon]

Can someone please outline, for me,  the relevant difference[s] between DA:O's DRM and DA:2's DRM? Because I'm not seeing any, and if it's basically the same thing, then I'm totally fine with it.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 22 janvier 2011 - 11:52 .

[Reaverwind]

-Zorph- wrote...

Wait let me get this straight...

You are cheating yourself out of great games, because you believe that you have even a slightest effect on the develoeprs by boycotting their games? First of all, you are not leading a righteous crusade of not purchasing a product, because most people would see your logic as extremely flawed.

If I really wanted to play a game, I wouldn't simply go against what I want to play as an entertainment product, simply because I believe online activation is wrong. I mean really, hook up an internet connection and activate it, but I guess you can't please them all.

Anyways, what I am trying to say is that you avoiding products is not 'voting with your money', because they could care less if one consumer stops buying their products, and they won't know that you don't agree with the DRM when you avoid them; so how in the world is it saying "Take your DRM and shove it!"

Seriously, your post was either a major joke, or you are a troll. Because I fail to see how making yourself prived from games, is in anyway a good thing.

Seriously? Sounds like someone has a gaming addiction to break. Games are NOT a necessity. They're a luxury.  There's no reason to jump through the hoops which gaming companies seem to want to induce for the sake of entertainment.

[packardbell]

That DRM sounds fair. I honestly don't see the problem and the need not to download a no-cd so you don't always need the disc helps it a bit.

[Sergeant Pepper]

I feel for those who don't have an internet connect; However, for me I'm glad if we don't need to keep the disk in the drive for DA2.

[Nighteye2]

FellowerOfOdin wrote...
I am fine with the hardest copy protection as long as it does not require a permanent internet connection...we all saw how Ubisoft failed.

I am fine with DRM if it does not ever interfere with my ability to play the game I legally bought, and does not interfere with any other programs on my PC.

2 very reasonable criteria that many DRM systems habitually violate. For example, the system with a limited number of activations, which DA2 thankfully won't use: if your PC crashes a few times and/or you forget to deactivate when reinstalling your OS, you run out of activations and are no longer able to play your legally owned game. Same story if the game company goes bankrupt or just decides to take the activation servers off-line. Or if you upgrade to a new OS that is incompatible with the old DRM.
For an example of the second, there have been types of DRM that use rootkits and install drivers on your machine, which remain loaded and active in system memory even when your game is not running. Or which stop your DVD drive from functioning properly.

[Jonp382]

Yrkoon wrote...

Can someone please outline, for me,  the relevant difference[s] between DA:O's DRM and DA:2's DRM? Because I'm not seeing any, and if it's basically the same thing, then I'm totally fine with it.

For DA:O, you have to activate your game online in order to play the DLCs. For DA2, supposedly you have to activate your game online in order to play DA2 in it's entirety.

For DA2, there is also a 5 consecutive activation limit in a 24-hour period; you can have the game installed on up to 5 computers at once in that time. Installations are unlimited like DA:O, as long as you do not surpass the 5 consecutive activation limit for DA2 in 24 hours.

For DA:O, you have to play with the disc in the drive. For DA2, you don't have to play with the disc in the drive after online activation.

Modifié par Jonp382, 22 janvier 2011 - 12:29 .

[D4rkFire]

Does this also apply to the consoles as well?

[FellowerOfOdin]

Nighteye2 wrote...


2 very reasonable criteria that many DRM systems habitually violate. For example, the system with a limited number of activations, which DA2 thankfully won't use: if your PC crashes a few times and/or you forget to deactivate when reinstalling your OS, you run out of activations and are no longer able to play your legally owned game. Same story if the game company goes bankrupt or just decides to take the activation servers off-line. Or if you upgrade to a new OS that is incompatible with the old DRM.

a) Most companies give out a revoke tool that resets the amount of installations.

Every company I know has a support service that will revoke your # of installations when you can prove being the legal owner of the game.

c) Your pc crashes 5 times in the 2 second window when the validation takes place? Statistically impossible.

d) Most DRM games get a no-DRM patch 1 year after release.

So...less myth, more busting.

[Paul_316]

Tried playing Dragon age Journeys, what a total waste of time that was can't even log in as it won't do @ symbol in my email address :/

[Nighteye2]

FellowerOfOdin wrote...

Nighteye2 wrote...
2 very reasonable criteria that many DRM systems habitually violate. For example, the system with a limited number of activations, which DA2 thankfully won't use: if your PC crashes a few times and/or you forget to deactivate when reinstalling your OS, you run out of activations and are no longer able to play your legally owned game. Same story if the game company goes bankrupt or just decides to take the activation servers off-line. Or if you upgrade to a new OS that is incompatible with the old DRM.

a) Most companies give out a revoke tool that resets the amount of installations.

Every company I know has a support service that will revoke your # of installations when you can prove being the legal owner of the game.

c) Your pc crashes 5 times in the 2 second window when the validation takes place? Statistically impossible.

d) Most DRM games get a no-DRM patch 1 year after release.

So...less myth, more busting.

a) which doesn't work on a crashed on formatted (at OS reinstallation) HDD
forcing players to maintain a database with proofs of purchase - instead of not needing to worry about it after buying it at the store.
c) not during the validation - after activation. If the number is limited and your HDD becomes unreadable due to a crash, you lose that activation.
d) Do they? I can't think of a single one, while I do know old games where such a patch was promised but never released.

[imkaoo]

d) Do they? I can't think of a single one, while I do know old games where such a patch was promised but never released.

That would be The Witcher They released.

Modifié par imkaoo, 22 janvier 2011 - 01:51 .

[Bryzon]

Well, I guess there are two ways of looking at this.



One is: People are going to find a way to pirate a game, especially one this popular, no matter what. Even Assassin's Creed 2 was pirated even though the legit copy required you to log into the servers to play. No matter how hard you try to prevent piracy, it will still happen, and arguably more likely to succeed to pirate the harder you try to protect with DRM. DRM only hurts the legitimate customers.



The other way to look at it is: You are paying for the game and if you want to have the convenience of accessing the EA servers to get DLC quickly, you'll need to login. Yes DRM is a hassle, but it is only natural for a Developer and Publisher to want to protect their investment and maximize profits. They hope to prevent piracy and force you to pay for your copy.



Sorry for the long post and playing devil's advocate, but issues like DRM and piracy in videogames bring up some really compelling questions.



Does DRM actually help prevent piracy from happening? Would you still buy the game if you were unable to pirate it? Would playing the game pirated make you want to buy it after you find out that you like it? Does DRM cause too much of a problem for legitimate customers and make them want to pirate? Would making the game more accessible with easier to purchase copies and playable demos be a better way to spend money intended for DRM?

[Nighteye2]

Bryzon wrote...
Does DRM actually help prevent piracy from happening? Would you still buy the game if you were unable to pirate it? Would playing the game pirated make you want to buy it after you find out that you like it? Does DRM cause too much of a problem for legitimate customers and make them want to pirate? Would making the game more accessible with easier to purchase copies and playable demos be a better way to spend money intended for DRM?

I have never purchased a game because it had DRM.

I have decided not to purchase some games becuase they had DRM.

[FellowerOfOdin]

Nighteye2 wrote...


a) which doesn't work on a crashed on formatted (at OS reinstallation) HDD
forcing players to maintain a database with proofs of purchase - instead of not needing to worry about it after buying it at the store.
c) not during the validation - after activation. If the number is limited and your HDD becomes unreadable due to a crash, you lose that activation.

If you seriously manage to ruin your HDD 5 times in a year, never ever touch a pc again and buy a console, you'd clearly have *some* issues.

d) - see above.

[Nighteye2]

FellowerOfOdin wrote...

Nighteye2 wrote...
a) which doesn't work on a crashed on formatted (at OS reinstallation) HDD
forcing players to maintain a database with proofs of purchase - instead of not needing to worry about it after buying it at the store.
c) not during the validation - after activation. If the number is limited and your HDD becomes unreadable due to a crash, you lose that activation.

If you seriously manage to ruin your HDD 5 times in a year, never ever touch a pc again and buy a console, you'd clearly have *some* issues.

d) - see above.

I know people who had a game with a 3-activation limit, and lost 2 activations due to reinstalls and 1 from a harddisk crash.

[edeheusch]

Nighteye2 wrote...

Bryzon wrote...
Does DRM actually help prevent piracy from happening? Would you still buy the game if you were unable to pirate it? Would playing the game pirated make you want to buy it after you find out that you like it? Does DRM cause too much of a problem for legitimate customers and make them want to pirate? Would making the game more accessible with easier to purchase copies and playable demos be a better way to spend money intended for DRM?

I have never purchased a game because it had DRM.

I have decided not to purchase some games becuase they had DRM.

It's the same for me, there are at least 2 games that I have not buy because of offline activation and I am sure that it is the case of many peoples. Before the release of DAO there were multiples huge topics about the online activation and I decided to by DAO when finally it was announced that it won't require online activation. 

I was worried about the fact that DA2 will be more action oriented but if it require an online activation it won't be a problem anymore as there are no way I would buy a single player game that require an internet connection. 

[PsychoBlonde]

Nighteye2 wrote...

FellowerOfOdin wrote...

Nighteye2 wrote...
a) which doesn't work on a crashed on formatted (at OS reinstallation) HDD
forcing players to maintain a database with proofs of purchase - instead of not needing to worry about it after buying it at the store.
c) not during the validation - after activation. If the number is limited and your HDD becomes unreadable due to a crash, you lose that activation.

If you seriously manage to ruin your HDD 5 times in a year, never ever touch a pc again and buy a console, you'd clearly have *some* issues.

d) - see above.

I know people who had a game with a 3-activation limit, and lost 2 activations due to reinstalls and 1 from a harddisk crash.

It's not a "five-activation limit", though.  It's a "five activations WITHIN 24 HOURS" limit.  If you manage to ruin 5 hard drives in 24 hours, just wait until tomorrow.  And stop using your hard drive for a hockey puck.

[Serenade]

And in the long run pirates will play the game without any DRM and disc, while we non-pirates will get frustrated. Thanks. If you want to stop piracy then first stop pissing your core consumers off, how about that?

[Jorina Leto]

imkaoo wrote...

d) Do they? I can't think of a single one, while I do know old games where such a patch was promised but never released.

That would be The Witcher They released.

The Witcher is not from EA. But Mass Effect has this horrible DRM and as far I know even the latest Patch doesn't remove it.

Therefore the One-Year-Argument is void. So the 5 activations still leads to the problem with chrashed HDDs


But the 24 hours thing still worries me. We need crarification. SOON!

[Wikal]

Jonp382 wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Can someone please outline, for me,  the relevant difference[s] between DA:O's DRM and DA:2's DRM? Because I'm not seeing any, and if it's basically the same thing, then I'm totally fine with it.

For DA:O, you have to activate your game online in order to play the DLCs. For DA2, supposedly you have to activate your game online in order to play DA2 in it's entirety.

For DA2, there is also a 5 consecutive activation limit in a 24-hour period; you can have the game installed on up to 5 computers at once in that time. Installations are unlimited like DA:O, as long as you do not surpass the 5 consecutive activation limit for DA2 in 24 hours.

For DA:O, you have to play with the disc in the drive. For DA2, you don't have to play with the disc in the drive after online activation.

Honestly...this isn't bad DRM, nor different from DAO. The quoted explanation  explained it very clearly for me. Thanks Yrkoon.

You had to go online to authenticate the DLC's for DAO, even for the Ultimate edition. The only difference is that you need to authenticate the entire game, which frankly isn't that big a leap. No need for disc in while playing? That's a plus in my book. As for the whole 5 computers within 24 hours, who is going to install DA2 on 5 systems within 24 hours? I'm perfectly fine with this new DRM.

Modifié par Wikal, 22 janvier 2011 - 03:46 .

[Nighteye2]

PsychoBlonde wrote...
It's not a "five-activation limit", though.  It's a "five activations WITHIN 24 HOURS" limit.  If you manage to ruin 5 hard drives in 24 hours, just wait until tomorrow.  And stop using your hard drive for a hockey puck.

Not for DA2. no - and I already said I'm thankful for that. But he was argueing pro-DRM in general and so I'm pointing out that some DRM are really, really bad. And that thankfully DA2 doesn't use one of those.

[Ailith Tycane]

Connect wrote...

Well guys, the EULA for Dragon Age II has just been posted a couple of hours ago on the EA website and it appears that they are going back to the dreadful days of the Mass Effect 1 DRM, even worse in some aspects.

So, here's the deal: you need an EA account, then you need to activate the game on that account and you are limited to running the game on 5 PCs in 24 hours. I realize most people will not play the game on 5 PCs in the same day, but I have a question:

WHAT THE PLOK WAS WRONG WITH THE DRM IN DRAGON AGE 1?

I just don't understand these people. Is it that hard to keep boxed copies on a DISC CHECK only? I thought they have learned their lesson with Mass Effect 1, but it seems they just keep going back to the online activation shenanigans.

Dragon Age Origins, Awakening, Mass Effect 2 - all wonderful games with friendly DRM (disc checks). I even bought 2 copies of Mass Effect 2 at launch to show my support for the friendly DRM. Yes, I bought one extra copy just for the DRM.

Now I have 2 pre-orders for the BioWare signature edition and I am canceling one and will probably cancel the second one too. Screw this, I'll get it in the bargain bin for 3 dollars next year.

If you put online activation DRM in Mass Effect 3 too then I am done with BioWare.

[DJBare]

Technically I've never had problems with DRM(accept the "Always online" from Ubi), but they are still a waste of time and money, bring it into context, people who download the game for free are not the problem, the problem is at the source, hackers and crackers, DRM does not thwart these people, it makes them smile, "ahh another challenge, lets see how long it takes me to crack this one", all DRM does is present a challenge to the ****** while punishing the customer, does anyone really think the ****** sits there pulling their hair out because another company has added another security layer, not a chance, they love it.