976 réponses à ce sujet

[bzombo]

StingingVelvet wrote...

bzombo wrote...

1. drm sucks, but it's here to stay. if there was zero benefit to drm, companies would scrap it. their bottom line is their profit, not making buyers suffer, so on some level it works.

It works at making shareholders feel better, or corporate executives feel better.  That's about it.

let's say your statement is fact. that is the point of a business: to make its shareholders happy. if ea gets good sales and makes shareholders happy to see piracy is being combatted, ea execs have done their job. all i said is it works on some level. if that level is assuaging shareholders' fears of pc game pirating, then it has accomplished something. i don't like drm, but i see how there's a need for it.

[StingingVelvet]

bzombo wrote...

StingingVelvet wrote...

bzombo wrote...

1. drm sucks, but it's here to stay. if there was zero benefit to drm, companies would scrap it. their bottom line is their profit, not making buyers suffer, so on some level it works.

It works at making shareholders feel better, or corporate executives feel better.  That's about it.

let's say your statement is fact. that is the point of a business: to make its shareholders happy. if ea gets good sales and makes shareholders happy to see piracy is being combatted, ea execs have done their job. all i said is it works on some level. if that level is assuaging shareholders' fears of pc game pirating, then it has accomplished something. i don't like drm, but i see how there's a need for it.

That's all well and good but I care more about my consumer rights than I do shareholders.

[AlanC9]

Deadmac wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
Well, your belief system is coherent, though I'm still not convinced of its rationality. OTOH, you didn't ask for anyone's opinion of it.

Nature of Web 2.0... Everyone has an opinion. Lol...

Remember, since I will never-ever know anyone here in real life, don't take my cold online nature as a sign that I do not like you. When companies create and open online forums for consumers, they are to be used for 'self-help' and 'ranting' purposes. Raving fans think 'everyone' should love 'everything' that embodies BioWare. As you can tell from many-many people who have issues with the DRM, the world is made up of diverse sets of  personalitites. Everyone's rants, raves, critisim, and concernes are allowed on these type of sites.

Sure, BioWare is only protecting their investments; however, the DRM is being interpreted as a means to 'control' the consumer. As a result of many-many software theives, everyone else who follows the rules gets screwed. What about my privacy? Why do I have to let BioWare know that I bought their product? I don't want BioWare to know me specifically. I just want to be an unknown consumer who goes about life without being a number in a database.

Huh? I'm not quite clear where you're going with the first paragraph. I wasn't especially interested in whether you liked me or not. Or are you saying that it just doesn't matter if someone's concerns are rational?

As for privacy, what good does it do you to be unknown to Bioware? Whether they have a name and address for you or not, you'd still be just a data point to them.

[LadyKarrakaz]

Kandid001 wrote...

Looks reasonable to me. Thanks CP.

edit: To those upset about online activation: While they didn't announce to do so, they may consider removing the online activation in a future patch, like some games which toned down the DRM a while after release.

If they patch the DRM as well as DAO was patched, let me have some doubts.

[bzombo]

StingingVelvet wrote...

bzombo wrote...

StingingVelvet wrote...

bzombo wrote...

1. drm sucks, but it's here to stay. if there was zero benefit to drm, companies would scrap it. their bottom line is their profit, not making buyers suffer, so on some level it works.

It works at making shareholders feel better, or corporate executives feel better.  That's about it.

let's say your statement is fact. that is the point of a business: to make its shareholders happy. if ea gets good sales and makes shareholders happy to see piracy is being combatted, ea execs have done their job. all i said is it works on some level. if that level is assuaging shareholders' fears of pc game pirating, then it has accomplished something. i don't like drm, but i see how there's a need for it.

That's all well and good but I care more about my consumer rights than I do shareholders.

and you have every right to do so, just as ea is allowed to add drm to their games if they so choose. vote with your wallet. if enough people feel like you and vote with their wallets, then maybe ea will make changes. for that to happen, though, sales would likely have to drop below origins' numbers, which is unlikely.

[Seifz]

AlanC9 wrote...

As for privacy, what good does it do you to be unknown to Bioware? Whether they have a name and address for you or not, you'd still be just a data point to them.

BioWare might not have an immediate use for my name and address, but that doesn't stop them from selling it to someone else.  If you think that doesn't happen with large companies, think again.  Thus far BioWare/EA hasn't done it (to my knowledge), but that could change any day and I'd be powerless to stop it.  Even worse, their database could be compromised and the information stolen from them.  This happens much more often than online retailers would like to admit.

That said, I used the EA Store to purchase ME1 and ME2 when they were super cheap a few months ago.  I made a rare exception for EA and gave them my personal information.  I did so because I got a product in return and because EA has had a good record thus far.

But why does this matter?  We have no idea what information they're collecting to determine which PC I'm using to enforce the 5/24 rule.  Are they collecting hardware information?  Software information?  Running processes?  Is it as simple as an easily-spoofed MAC address?  We just don't know.  I'm not comfortable transferring unknown data to EA's servers.  That anyone at all is boggles my mind.

[entr0py]

With respect, I have just one question. Since the game is linked to your EA account, does this eliminate the possibility of resale? Or will there be some method of unlinking the game from your account?



Thank you.

[Seifz]

Purple Lady wrote...

Kandid001 wrote...

Looks reasonable to me. Thanks CP.

edit: To those upset about online activation: While they didn't announce to do so, they may consider removing the online activation in a future patch, like some games which toned down the DRM a while after release.

If they patch the DRM as well as DAO was patched, let me have some doubts.

Seriously.  The quality of support shown by BioWare since the EA takeover is quite poor compared to their previous efforts.  DA:O is still all sorts of broken.

Besides, they still haven't patched the insane DRM out of ME1 and it's been almost three years, now.  I don't see why anyone thinks they'll patch this out in a timely fashion.

[Deadmac]

Here are a few questions for everyone...
~ Why is it worth buying any game if you are going to be harassed by the developer and publisher?

~ Could companies who use excessive DRM be sued for consumer harassment?

~ Why would you buy a game from a company in which utilizes software, which allows them to intrude in any significant way into your lfie?

~ Where does my consumer privacy from the developer and publisher begin?

Since the consumer exchanges money for a product, the consumer now owns the product in which is purchased. When I bought the game "Dragon Age: Origins", BioWare's ownership over my copy expires. Regardless about the legal notices they release with the game, I now own the game and the privacy to use it as to how I see fit.

Again, do you have to register a toaster oven, lamp, pillows, and sneakers before using them?

Modifié par Deadmac, 01 février 2011 - 07:49 .

[Iregart]

Hmm, I don't like the idea of this DRM. In my opinion it is even more evil than the one used in ME1. I bought the game, I paid for it, I even authorized it on install, but what ... still a check every few days. I am really thinking about the possibility to cancel my Signature Edition and stopping to even think about ME3...

Modifié par Iregart, 01 février 2011 - 07:49 .

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Steam's DRM is a different animal.

While it doesn't require calls home, it does prevent reinstallation.  You can install a new version of the game, but you're not allowed to reinstall the original version if its been patched in the meantime.

Meaning, for instance, that you can't play Portal without the retconned ending.

[Reaverwind]

Seifz wrote...

Purple Lady wrote...

Kandid001 wrote...

Looks reasonable to me. Thanks CP.

edit: To those upset about online activation: While they didn't announce to do so, they may consider removing the online activation in a future patch, like some games which toned down the DRM a while after release.

If they patch the DRM as well as DAO was patched, let me have some doubts.

Seriously.  The quality of support shown by BioWare since the EA takeover is quite poor compared to their previous efforts.  DA:O is still all sorts of broken.

Besides, they still haven't patched the insane DRM out of ME1 and it's been almost three years, now.  I don't see why anyone thinks they'll patch this out in a timely fashion.

To anybody that does - I've got property on the moon to sell them.

[Morroian]

Seifz wrote...

But why does this matter?  We have no idea what information they're collecting to determine which PC I'm using to enforce the 5/24 rule.  Are they collecting hardware information?  Software information?  Running processes?  Is it as simple as an easily-spoofed MAC address?  We just don't know.  I'm not comfortable transferring unknown data to EA's servers.  That anyone at all is boggles my mind.

You had no idea with DAO how is this different?

[vometia]

I'm mostly pleased to see that the DRM seems to be rather conducive, especiall compared to some draconian schemes that we've seen elsewhere.  I'm especially happy to see that the likes of SecuROM aren't present.  But (and there's always a but)...

Chris Priestly wrote...

- You can play offline but the game will require a login check after a select period of days.

This is a bit of a concern.  The reason is that DA:O often failed to authenticate properly due to the download manager failing to start, crashing or whatever it did which could lock the user out of paid-for content, sometimes obviously, other times allowing them to play and corrupting their savegames.  Have these issues been properly fixed in DA2?

What are the longer-term consequences?  Say I want to install in five years' time and EA has hypothetically gone out of business (as we've seen, especially lately, no company is indestructible) and the buyer isn't interested in continuing to run the authorisation servers... what then?


Edit: apologies if these points have already been raised: the link I followed filtered out the subsequent posts...

Modifié par vometia, 01 février 2011 - 07:52 .

[bzombo]

Deadmac wrote...

Here are a few questions for everyone...
~ Why is it worth buying any game if you are going to be harassed by the developer and publisher?

~ Could companies who use excessive DRM be sued for consumer harassment?

~ Why would you buy a game from a company in which utilizes software, which allows them to intrude in any significant way into your lfie?

Since the consumer exchanges money for a product, the consumer now owns the product in which is purchased. When I bought the game "Dragon Age: Origins", BioWare's ownership over my copy expires. Regardless about the legal notices they release with the game, I now own the game and the privacy to use it as to how I see fit.

Again, do you have to register a toaster oven, lamp, pillows, and sneakers before using them?

whether it is worth it is a personal choice for you to make.

i don't think they could be sued since the information is out there before purchase. you are not required to buy a video game. it is a luxury item you choose to engage in. if the games were shipped riddled with viruses then maybe a case could be made.

i've thought about this. not sure i have a good answer.

lastly, eula is an end user license agreement, not anything more. you pay for the right to play their software. you are "licensing" it. all you technically own is the box, disc, and anything else inside. you do no own the game code, etc. you license that so you can play it.

Modifié par bzombo, 01 février 2011 - 07:55 .

[Seifz]

Morroian wrote...

Seifz wrote...

But why does this matter?  We have no idea what information they're collecting to determine which PC I'm using to enforce the 5/24 rule.  Are they collecting hardware information?  Software information?  Running processes?  Is it as simple as an easily-spoofed MAC address?  We just don't know.  I'm not comfortable transferring unknown data to EA's servers.  That anyone at all is boggles my mind.

You had no idea with DAO how is this different?

I could play DA:O offline and EA wasn't getting any information at all?

[Deadmac]

Iregart wrote...

Hmm, I don't like the idea of this DRM. In my opinion it is even more evil than the one used in ME1. I bought the game, I paid for it, I even authorized it on install, but what ... still a check every few days. I am really thinking about the possibility to cancel my Signature Edition and stopping to even think about ME3...

Have you ever heard of a nanny state? When governments put something like this into action, we normally call this type of practice dictatorship and communism. BioWare is dictating how you use their products after you paid to own them. Once you own the product after purchase, consumers should have a right to do whatever they want. Money was exchanged for ownership. BioWare's (or any other compay) influence over how you use their product should end after money is exchanged.

Modifié par Deadmac, 01 février 2011 - 07:57 .

[StingingVelvet]

bzombo wrote...

StingingVelvet wrote...

bzombo wrote...

StingingVelvet wrote...

bzombo wrote...

1. drm sucks, but it's here to stay. if there was zero benefit to drm, companies would scrap it. their bottom line is their profit, not making buyers suffer, so on some level it works.

It works at making shareholders feel better, or corporate executives feel better.  That's about it.

let's say your statement is fact. that is the point of a business: to make its shareholders happy. if ea gets good sales and makes shareholders happy to see piracy is being combatted, ea execs have done their job. all i said is it works on some level. if that level is assuaging shareholders' fears of pc game pirating, then it has accomplished something. i don't like drm, but i see how there's a need for it.

That's all well and good but I care more about my consumer rights than I do shareholders.

and you have every right to do so, just as ea is allowed to add drm to their games if they so choose. vote with your wallet. if enough people feel like you and vote with their wallets, then maybe ea will make changes. for that to happen, though, sales would likely have to drop below origins' numbers, which is unlikely.

Indeed, but in order for that tactic to work a majority of consumers would have to be educated on the dangers of activation and also care about playing their games in 20 years.  Most consumers don't care.

At least on the PC the open platform nature of it prevents EA from ever actually taking my games away.  Because of that I tolerate DRM and support the developers, I choose the lesser of two evils.  On a closed system like the consoles though I would never ever buy a game that required activation, including all the DLC and arcade games on Xbox Live.  That is where I draw the line.

Someday when those games or DLC are not playable anymore people will know why.

[AlanC9]

Seifz wrote...
BioWare might not have an immediate use for my name and address, but that doesn't stop them from selling it to someone else.  If you think that doesn't happen with large companies, think again.  Thus far BioWare/EA hasn't done it (to my knowledge), but that could change any day and I'd be powerless to stop it.  Even worse, their database could be compromised and the information stolen from them.  This happens much more often than online retailers would like to admit.

Sure, but... so what? What happens then?

[Seifz]

AlanC9 wrote...

Seifz wrote...
BioWare might not have an immediate use for my name and address, but that doesn't stop them from selling it to someone else.  If you think that doesn't happen with large companies, think again.  Thus far BioWare/EA hasn't done it (to my knowledge), but that could change any day and I'd be powerless to stop it.  Even worse, their database could be compromised and the information stolen from them.  This happens much more often than online retailers would like to admit.

Sure, but... so what? What happens then?

Wait, you don't see the obvious problems with unauthorized people getting my name and address?  Are you serious or is this one of those trolling things?

[Jonp382]

vometia wrote...

What are the longer-term consequences?  Say I want to install in five years' time and EA has hypothetically gone out of business (as we've seen, especially lately, no company is indestructible) and the buyer isn't interested in continuing to run the authorisation servers... what then?

Fernando claims there will be a patch in case that very thing happens.

You can read his post here.

Modifié par Jonp382, 01 février 2011 - 08:00 .

[DanaScu]

Seifz wrote...
Seriously.  The quality of support shown by BioWare since the EA takeover is quite poor compared to their previous efforts.  DA:O is still all sorts of broken.

Besides, they still haven't patched the insane DRM out of ME1 and it's been almost three years, now.  I don't see why anyone thinks they'll patch this out in a timely fashion.

That's because when Bioware was still Bioware and not EABioware, they handled their own support. When the first major uproar started about the "EA phone home every 5-10 days or your legal copy of the game shuts down/are you a pirate yet" drm, Chris asked what could be done to improve things. One of the first and most mentioned was DO NOT LET EA HANDLE THE TECH SUPPORT. Chris pointed out that Jason Barlow was one person who did whatever tech support he could, and EA had TEAMS of techs to do support. In turn, multiple posters pointed out just how bad the tech support from EA was/is if we all were thrilled and satisfied with what Jason could do, and wanted him to continue doing so, instead of the clueless read from a script no matter what the person says techs. Which means that EA's tech support still continues its finest tradition of sucking big time.

I think ME was the first game released by EABioware. Even though the game has been released on Steam, and has been out for over two years, they still haven't patched out the drm for the retail version. I hope no one is going to hold their breath for a no-drm patch for a new game.

[bzombo]

Jonp382 wrote...

vometia wrote...

What are the longer-term consequences?  Say I want to install in five years' time and EA has hypothetically gone out of business (as we've seen, especially lately, no company is indestructible) and the buyer isn't interested in continuing to run the authorisation servers... what then?

Fernando claims there will be a patch in case that very thing happens.

You can read his post here.

to play devil's advocate for a second; if ea/bioware expects anyone to believe them, they should patch the drm out of origins to show they mean it. otherwise, i could say i'll patch it out. it's meaningless.

[Deadmac]

StingingVelvet wrote...
Someday when those games or DLC are not playable anymore people will know why.

Not only that... If people buy a piece of software that calls home, they lose out when the company's servers go down. Even though some of my games are ten years old, I ocassionally install them for a play through. Imagine how I would feel if the server no longer existed? Since the product is out of circulation, I would have no means to activate to play the game. Consumers would be out of both cash and the product in which they now own.

Modifié par Deadmac, 01 février 2011 - 08:06 .