480 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

Well sure, but you could say that about anything - even murder if the DA doesn't prosecute for example. Not to equate piracy with murder, obviously.

AlanC9 wrote...

I believe he's talking about moral justification, not legal. I've got a tough time seeing anything wrong with abandonware myself.

Sure.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 21 janvier 2011 - 10:03 .

[In Exile]

the_one_54321 wrote...
Granted, but as I mentioned above, that's assuming they have any kind of motivation to do so.

In terms of consequences? Sure. But that isn't any different than pirating the game now, expect re: chances of punishment.

[the_one_54321]

In Exile wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
Granted, but as I mentioned above, that's assuming they have any kind of motivation to do so.

In terms of consequences? Sure. But that isn't any different than pirating the game now, expect re: chances of punishment.

The issue then becomes the identification of who is victimized and how. Let's say I want a copy of FFVII. I can buy one on ebay or Amazon, I can download it via my PS3, or I can pirate it. Squeenix is actively distributing the game so they stand to loose something by me playing the game without paying for it. That would be the difference between that situation and one where the company is literally doing nothing with the game. It's been abandoned and is just sitting on their list of holding because they picked it up off of a company that went bankrupt.

[upsettingshorts]

I understand, but principle and the law are not always in agreement. You could take your argument to court, but - granted I am not up on any relevant case law - just because what you said makes sense from a logical perspective does not mean that, given Square Enix decided to act, you'd end up with a favorable decision.  That's if you took them to court, most if not all of these piracy cases are settled pre-trial, for various reasons - some rather revealing.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 21 janvier 2011 - 10:09 .

[slimgrin]

Count Viceroy wrote...

s0meguy6665 wrote...

it's funny, the only people that are inconvenienced by the DRM are people that actually buy the game

Indeed.

Yep. Pirates circumvent all of it. It's only a hassle for those buying the game legally.

Brilliant...punish your customers, then they'll never come back. 

Modifié par slimgrin, 21 janvier 2011 - 10:10 .

[the_one_54321]

Upsettingshorts wrote...
I understand, but principle and the law are not always in agreement. You could take your argument to court, but - granted I am not up on any relevant case law - just because what you said makes sense from a logical perspective does not mean that, given Square Enix decided to act, you'd end up with a favorable decision.

Well Squeenix still exists and is still distributing the game. (I own a copy of that game btw) So they would have an interest in protecting it's sales. A game that has been abandoned has no issue with lost sales and no one to have a motivation for taking on "illegal use."

[In Exile]

the_one_54321 wrote...
The issue then becomes the identification of who is victimized and how. Let's say I want a copy of FFVII. I can buy one on ebay or Amazon, I can download it via my PS3, or I can pirate it. Squeenix is actively distributing the game so they stand to loose something by me playing the game without paying for it. That would be the difference between that situation and one where the company is literally doing nothing with the game. It's been abandoned and is just sitting on their list of holding because they picked it up off of a company that went bankrupt.

If this situation actually happened, and if EA actually came after you, it would be a matter to settle in court. At that point it becomes too muddled for me to even comment. Like I said - I am not a lawyer yet. Even if I was, I wouldn't be able to comment on what exactly could happen at court. That depends on far too many things.

I can appreciate your position and why you feel the way you do, but EA owns the IP. They are under no obligation to sell you DA2. Technically, if this idea of licensing versus owning software stands up legally, they aren't even obligated to guarantee that you could use the software indefinitely.

So I get the outrage - I'm just not sure you have any recourse, or would legally be seen as the victim. It depends on so many thing it's just not possible to make any kind of reasonable claim about it.

[coolide]

crimzontearz wrote...

god I'm glad I game on my Xbox

Here here!  Xbox is for true ballas.  Ball on my brotha.

And what is the big deal with registrering things online?  My goodness you people make such big deals about every little thing.  You had to do the same thing with Half-Life 2.

[slimgrin]

coolide wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

god I'm glad I game on my Xbox

Here here!  Xbox is for true ballas.  Ball on my brotha.

And what is the big deal with registrering things online?  My goodness you people make such big deals about every little thing.  You had to do the same thing with Half-Life 2.

Go play with your funbox.

[coolide]

ankuu wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Catsith wrote...

Uh, I never said that. I know DA2 is going to be pirated like crazy, probably more than DA:O was. And I'm sure TW2 will be pirated even more than either of them. 

If TW2 is pirated more than DA2 there'll be a good chance its beause its better selling than DA2.

Not because of some DRM scheme.

TW2 might not be pirated due the the warnings they've set out. A company is going to track down those who download it ilegal and sent them a nice fine.

You actually fall for those threats?  You aren't required to pay corporate fines.  I'm going to download the Witcher 2 just to spite all of you fanboys.  And I'm going to seed it for years.

[the_one_54321]

coolide wrote...
And what is the big deal with registrering things online?  My goodness you people make such big deals about every little thing.  You had to do the same thing with Half-Life 2.

Funny, I didn't buy Half-Life 2.

It's not such a big deal at face value. It could easily become a big deal if you sit and really think about the implications it has for your purchase and what you can do with it.

[the_one_54321]

coolide wrote...
You actually fall for those threats?  You aren't required to pay corporate fines.  I'm going to download the Witcher 2 just to spite all of you fanboys.  And I'm going to seed it for years.

That type of talk gets people banned around here. Maybe you don't care, but I'm just saying...

[upsettingshorts]

the_one_54321 wrote...

It's not such a big deal at face value. It could easily become a big deal if you sit and really think about the implications it has for your purchase and what you can do with it.

You could also sit and really think about the implications it has for your purchase and be fine with it, too.   Though that might seem like a silly thing to point out, I figured I might as well.   It is, after all, our money.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 21 janvier 2011 - 10:17 .

[deuce985]

Fail to see how this is bad compared to other DRMs. it is better than putting spyware on my PC and I'll never use that 5 PC limit anyway...

[the_one_54321]

deuce985 wrote...
Fail to see how this is bad compared to other DRMs. it is better than putting spyware on my PC and I'll never use that 5 PC limit anyway...

Well one of the quotes from the EULA says that you must accept the possibility that the DRM will dissable some programs on your computer. I don't know about you, but I am not alright with a program doing anything to any other program on my system unless I want it to.

[Moondoggie]

What exactly is so unreasonable? You have all registered games on here and created accounts so i'm pretty sure an EA account is a non issue. Who the hell is going to activate the game on more than 5 PC's in 24 hours? How is this worse than Valve forcing you to have Steam to play their games or GFWL games forcing you to have that....Thing to play those games or Ubisoft....Well you get the idea.



Compared to the horror of installing and activating some games this should not be that bad. But i see how the trolls can use this as ammo to get the fanbase in a rage over nothing.

[upsettingshorts]

the_one_54321 wrote...
Well one of the quotes from the EULA says that you must accept the possibility that the DRM will dissable some programs on your computer. I don't know about you, but I am not alright with a program doing anything to any other program on my system unless I want it to.

It says it might interfere with programs that attempt to circumvent access restrictions as prohibited by the DMCA.  I take that to mean it actively interferes with anything that tries to interfere with it.  But like I said, if it turns out to be some kind of malware hunter-killer software - which isn't what the EULA leads me to believe - of course I won't like that.

Moondoggie wrote...

Compared to the horror of installing and activating some games this should not be that bad. But i see how the trolls can use this as ammo to get the fanbase in a rage over nothing.

Trolling is dishonest.  I don't think the people upset are being dishonest.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 21 janvier 2011 - 10:21 .

[deuce985]

the_one_54321 wrote...

deuce985 wrote...
Fail to see how this is bad compared to other DRMs. it is better than putting spyware on my PC and I'll never use that 5 PC limit anyway...

Well one of the quotes from the EULA says that you must accept the possibility that the DRM will dissable some programs on your computer. I don't know about you, but I am not alright with a program doing anything to any other program on my system unless I want it to.

Well, in that case it likely means it will be putting some type of spyware/virus on my PC...

[imkaoo]

Maconbar wrote...

I was just joking.

Allright, you got me  Sorry!

[the_one_54321]

Upsettingshorts wrote...
Trolling is dishonest.  I don't think the people upset are being dishonest.

I'm not super upset, really. As pointed out, this is nowhere near the level of what Ubisoft is doing. (I am completely boycotting Ubisoft games while they have that policy, btw) But I'm not happy about it, and it's made what was already a game I was unlikely to buy into a game that I am nearly 100% certain not to buy.

[FedericoV]

ViSeirA wrote...

bzombo wrote...

what's makes your baseless assumption any better? at least i have sales figures of the original games to back up my "baseless" assumption. you have happy thoughts to back up yours.

Oh really? TW1 sold 1 million copies worldwide in the first 2 weeks of release, that went up to 1.5 million copies before the release of the enhanced edition and THAT was for a PC only game... I don't want to sound like I prefer TW over DA because I don't and each game has its strengths and weaknesses so I'll stop write there and won't comment on the topic again.

Bull****. TW1 sold 1 million only months after the Enhanced Edition. I'm sure of that because the devs write a post about it on their site.

Having said that: a company has all the rights to fight piracy but DRM are mostly a waste of resources that screw only legit customers. No problem with one time activation but sadly it won't stop the game being pirated.

Modifié par FedericoV, 21 janvier 2011 - 10:41 .

[lv12medic]

JoePinasi1989 wrote...

... pirate-proof DRM ...

That's as likely to happen as Isabela wanting to wear a chastity belt.  (gotta keep it DA2 related).

Anyways, as long as I can play the game, I don't mind DRM that much.  It annoys me when online checking servers for the DRM are offline or get shut down.  Or my internet goes down.  I don't think there is or ever will be a perfect solution.  DA:O's was mildly annoying when starting up the game I magically had un-authenticated DLC, having to close the game and restart it to get it to work.  If it functions similar to DA:O, and from what I've seen it will be similar, then I won't mind.  It doesn't sound like I have to be connected just to get the game to run.  Just connected to be able to use DLC.

The wost DRM I've seen has been for Wings of Prey (WW2 Flight sim game) that requires Yu Play.  That thing is just a pain to get it to work.

[Loerwyn]

JoePinasi1989 wrote...

I doubt it's the same as with AC2. From what I read and heard Ubisoft used the time between the console release and the PC release not on bug fixing but on a pirate-proof DRM which apparently got 'cracked' in one day..

That's because it didn't happen. It took a number of weeks for the DRM to be fully cracked.

[Ryzaki]

Yup and during that time even some people who bought the game couldn't play it at times.



Well done Ubisoft. Well done.