260 réponses à ce sujet

[RiouHotaru]

Enernanut wrote...

Let's review the facts:

Oh boy here we go

Enernanut wrote...
Claims:
-Bioware made a specific claim that the game would not have securom.
-They also claimed that the drm wouldn't install anything to the hard drive and that any files used would be removed after the release date.

-It doesn't have SecuROM
-Nothing is installed on the hard-drive, and the excutable DOES indeed remove itself

Enernanut wrote...
Reality:
-The release check is made by sony dadc, the company behind securom.
-It connects to the same sony dadc servers that securom does.
-The dfa.dll used has "SecuROM" in the file description.
-The error message directs you to the securom support website.
-None of the files or reg entries are removed until the game is uninstalled, some are still left after that.

-Yeah, sony DADC made it (doesn't make it SecuROM)
-Yes it connects to their servers (STILL not SecuROM)
-This is true (But it's in name only, there's no rootkit)
-Because the program was made by Sony DADC
-The executables are removed, what is left behind are benign registry keys which can't be executed and sit in a temp folder until you delete it, otherwise they do absolutely nothing.


Again, just because it's made by the same team and shares files in common does NOT make it SecuROM.  I mean really, we've had two moderators, including one tech expert, say so, but people continue to perpetuate the myth that the date release check is SecuROM.

I've been enjoying a friend's copy at his place and he's had no issues whatsoever.

[arghhhjustletmein]

The thing is they are arguing over technicalities and detail that most people don't care about. I realise this is probably to cover themselves legally, but even so to most people if it looks like SecuROM, smells like SecuROM, tastes like SecuROM, and sucks the life force from the universe like SecuROM (ok, I made that last one up), then to most people it is SecuROM.

By admitting that you had a bunch of guys from SecuROM, who previously made bits of SecuROM to write a programs that works the same as something related to SecuROM, and they do a rubbish job leaving traces of, suprise, suprise SecuROM on peoples machines, well it does look a bit iffy.

Oh and I don't get the whole 'Nothing is installed' but 'The executable removes itself', which is it ? Either it does install something which later removes itself or it installs nothing, it can't do both surely ?

I should add that I accept the explanation, it was good enough to change my mind and I've purchased the game, but I get why people are a bit mad about it.

[KyreneZA]

RiouHotaru wrote...

-Nothing is installed on the hard-drive, and the excutable DOES indeed remove itself

Even left-over benign files in a temp directory, does =/= nothing. It does install itself, it does (apparently) do its job, it just doesn't de-install itself cleanly and that is the issue. Your counter argument is false.

Whether anyone should rightly be concerned about these left-over files and/or registry entries, I cannot comment on (or argue with/against you about), as I'm not all that familiar with the SecuROM problems in the past. I've had my share with the version that shipped with NWN2, but don't know what happened to SecuROM or EA after that.

Point is, the executable DOES NOT indeed remove itself cleanly.

[didymos1120]

arghhhjustletmein wrote...


Oh and I don't get the whole 'Nothing is installed' but 'The executable removes itself', which is it ? Either it does install something which later removes itself or it installs nothing, it can't do both surely ?

I imagine they mean "installed" in the sense that it's intended to be anything other than temporary and that it will actually do anything once the date check is done.  Generally, something that leaves files in the temp folder isn't considered "installed" in any meaningful sense.  It's junk data as far as the OS is concerned.

[didymos1120]

Kyrene wrote...

Point is, the executable DOES NOT indeed remove itself cleanly.

No, the actual executable DOES get removed.  What's left (in some but not all cases) are a couple data files and maybe a dll, neither of which can do a damn thing without being read and/or loaded by that now non-existent EXE.

Modifié par didymos1120, 14 mars 2011 - 09:53 .

[uDoh]

You made a big deal of saying in the FAO that the Date Checker did not use SecuROM. But why did you NOT just tell us what it DID contain, and who wrote it.

I still don't understand why you didn't tell us that the Date Checker was made by Sony DADC, and let us make the choice. It really seems like you were trying to hide this fact, which is a real shame, and does make it difficult for us to trust you now.

[Enernanut]

RiouHotaru wrote...

(snip)

-It doesn't have SecuROM
-Nothing is installed on the hard-drive, and the excutable DOES indeed remove itself

(snip)

-Yeah, sony DADC made it (doesn't make it SecuROM)
-Yes it connects to their servers (STILL not SecuROM)
-This is true (But it's in name only, there's no rootkit)
-Because the program was made by Sony DADC
-The executables are removed, what is left behind are benign registry keys which can't be executed and sit in a temp folder until you delete it, otherwise they do absolutely nothing.


Again, just because it's made by the same team and shares files in common does NOT make it SecuROM.  I mean really, we've had two moderators, including one tech expert, say so, but people continue to perpetuate the myth that the date release check is SecuROM.

I've been enjoying a friend's copy at his place and he's had no issues whatsoever.

The executables and reg entries are not removed, some of them are left even after you uninstall the game.  I'm not sure what their lawyers definition of install is but I consider any program that copies files to a folder AND creates registry entries an install. 

According to some of the file descriptions even sony dadc calls it securom, the only ones claiming that it's not is bioware.  It appears to be one of the more benign versions of securom but it's ridiculous that bioware is trying to claim that it's not.

For many people including myself the issue is not whether this is the dreaded rootkit version but that bioware flat out lied about it, it's a trust issue more than a drm issue.

[philbo1965uk]

Hmmm..... so which software is being implemented for it's limited activation checks ?

[Sniper11709]

Can i just point to a post by Fernando Melo 10 days ago in the Dragon Age 2 Final DRM and FAQ thread.

Fernando Melo wrote...

The release control software is
also made by Sony DADC, the same team that makes securom.  But it is not
the same product - for instance, it does not install anything etc just
as we've stated before.  They have the same support site though which is
the URL you're seeing.

So to everyone saying they hid the fact that it was made by the same team, if you actually bothered doing any research you would have found out they didn't hide it.

Modifié par Sniper11709, 14 mars 2011 - 01:33 .

[BaronIveagh]

Enernanut wrote...
The executables and reg entries are not removed, some of them are left even after you uninstall the game.  I'm not sure what their lawyers definition of install is but I consider any program that copies files to a folder AND creates registry entries an install. 

According to some of the file descriptions even sony dadc calls it securom, the only ones claiming that it's not is bioware.  It appears to be one of the more benign versions of securom but it's ridiculous that bioware is trying to claim that it's not.

For many people including myself the issue is not whether this is the dreaded rootkit version but that bioware flat out lied about it, it's a trust issue more than a drm issue.

Unfortunatly, this. 

The fact that it gets installed at all, even if it is then 'removed', damages my computer's functionality.  I can't sue them for damages, under the terms of the EULA, but I would not have bought it if I had known that SecuROM (or it's derived components) were on the disk.  I suppose I could claim fraud, but I lack the money to sue EA successfully. 

[Massefeckt]

The problem is Securom was such a nasty piece of work that anything connected with it in anyway will cause discontent. Why use it or the company that made it in the first place?

These programs do nothing to stop piracy, they only cause problems for those of us who actually buy our games. It's the same as DVD's that make you sit through anti piracy or legal screens that can't be skipped pirates don't have to put up with any of that just those that actually buy their stuff. Companies that use these things always come across as out of touch with the market they sell too.

[voteDC]

Garak2 wrote...

So why does any company care if you start a game a few hours early?

it's to stop people buying the game early and breaking review embargos and the like.

The thing that puzzles me is that the pirates were playing this before release day but those who did buy the game had to wait to play it.

[didymos1120]

voteDC wrote...

The thing that puzzles me is that the pirates were playing this before release day but those who did buy the game had to wait to play it.

And such is the way of DRM: it's the placebo effect for corporations.  Digital faith healing.  It sounds like it's all secure and stuff, and they're convinced it must do something, despite internet reality smacking them in the face at every turn. 

[Akitoscorpio]

voteDC wrote...

Garak2 wrote...

So why does any company care if you start a game a few hours early?

it's to stop people buying the game early and breaking review embargos and the like.

The thing that puzzles me is that the pirates were playing this before release day but those who did buy the game had to wait to play it.

Yeah this is actually true, and it's bloody annoying, I remeber hearing about a few DS games that got leaked early before they were on store shelves....

[Vollkeule]

not better as securom, it is still malware from sony... i wish i had a ripped off pirated copy

[Warrgh]

Good gracious. We get it. Some of you don't like the direction the Dragon Age series has taken. That doesn't mean you have to whine about every single little flaw you can find and blow everything completely out of proportions. The amount of nerdraging basement dwellers on these forums the last few days has been sickening.

The game does NOT use SecuROM DRM. It uses a simple release date check program which happens to utilize some of the same files as SecuROM. Neither me nor anyone I know had any issues whatsoever with this, it was completely unintrusive, and I just confirmed that the executable indeed deleted itself from my computer (and a program without an executable is as useful as wheels without a car attached). There's no harm done. No laws were broken. No kittens were drowned. Relax. Take a chill pill.

This is very basic computing. My old grandmother could have explained it. It's not very difficult to understand. Really, stop throwing hissyfits about everything and nothing.DA2-related. There's no conspiracy. Then again, it seems like maturity, common sense and reason is too much to ask from a gaming-related forum. Jeesh.

[iSpectre]

LOL. Only if the Release Control team had developed it such that it didnt have Securom logo and stuff in it, these confusion and hatred wouldnt have appeared. Afterall, when developing a new product, why reuse the libraries/functionalities from a previous product that was so tainted like securom?

[Massefeckt]

Warrgh wrote...

Good gracious. We get it. Some of you don't like the direction the Dragon Age series has taken. That doesn't mean you have to whine about every single little flaw you can find and blow everything completely out of proportions. The amount of nerdraging basement dwellers on these forums the last few days has been sickening.

The game does NOT use SecuROM DRM. It uses a simple release date check program which happens to utilize some of the same files as SecuROM. Neither me nor anyone I know had any issues whatsoever with this, it was completely unintrusive, and I just confirmed that the executable indeed deleted itself from my computer (and a program without an executable is as useful as wheels without a car attached). There's no harm done. No laws were broken. No kittens were drowned. Relax. Take a chill pill.

This is very basic computing. My old grandmother could have explained it. It's not very difficult to understand. Really, stop throwing hissyfits about everything and nothing.DA2-related. There's no conspiracy. Then again, it seems like maturity, common sense and reason is too much to ask from a gaming-related forum. Jeesh.

Look up Securom's history and just what it has done, it and anything related to it should be barred by game makers on principle alone. It also doesn't work the amount of games out on pirate sites before the games are even released proves that, all this DRM does is inflict potentially damaging spyware on those of us who actually like to buy our games.

It's great you haven't had problems but others have, but I guess it's easier to pass it all off as DA2 hate rather than stand up for principles.

[MacMurphy]

Warrgh wrote...

Good gracious. We get it. Some of you don't like the direction the Dragon Age series has taken. That doesn't mean you have to whine about every single little flaw you can find and blow everything completely out of proportions. The amount of nerdraging basement dwellers on these forums the last few days has been sickening.

The game does NOT use SecuROM DRM. It uses a simple release date check program which happens to utilize some of the same files as SecuROM. Neither me nor anyone I know had any issues whatsoever with this, it was completely unintrusive, and I just confirmed that the executable indeed deleted itself from my computer (and a program without an executable is as useful as wheels without a car attached). There's no harm done. No laws were broken. No kittens were drowned. Relax. Take a chill pill.

This is very basic computing. My old grandmother could have explained it. It's not very difficult to understand. Really, stop throwing hissyfits about everything and nothing.DA2-related. There's no conspiracy. Then again, it seems like maturity, common sense and reason is too much to ask from a gaming-related forum. Jeesh.

one of the very few coherent and level headed posts i have read on this forum of late. well said.

[SStKelley]

This article clearly shows the level of deceit being woven.

http://www.reclaimyo...In-Dragon-Age-2

SecurRom has shown to be a very shady company in the past. They have never done anything to improve their image or warrant trusting them, and I for one, am glad I chose not to purchase DA2 due to the fact that they may try to weasle SecurRom into it in ANY form. I will never purchase a product containing any code from this company.

Modifié par SStKelley, 14 mars 2011 - 07:01 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

kinseeker35 wrote...

Its only nessesary when you frist install i think.

But it's necessary every time you install the game.  You're installed now, but if you get a new Windows installation or a new PC, you'll need to reinstall.

I've installed Baldur's Gate repeatedly over the past 12 years.  I'm about to install it again (I damaged my last install experimenting with BGTutu).  If I buy a game, I want to be able to use it forever.

[Lawliet89]

Sighs, to be honest, I don't really buy the explanation. While it is generally agreed that the release control was inert, it is still securom and people are wary of that.

Even if they were different, I'm sure EA should have known better to distance themselves from anything remotely called securom after the giant debacle called "Spore".

[BigJas]

RiouHotaru wrote...

<snip>

Again, just because it's made by the same team and shares files in common does NOT make it SecuROM.  I mean really, we've had two moderators, including one tech expert, say so, but people continue to perpetuate the myth that the date release check is SecuROM.

I've been enjoying a friend's copy at his place and he's had no issues whatsoever.

SecuRom is the name for a group of technologies used to implement DRM. 'Release Control' is one such mechanism. Taking a quote from the SecROM website, "Don’t take a chance. Use SecuROM Release Control to make sure you are the only one who decides when you title releases."

It's probably better to think of 'SecROM' as a brand name for DRM solutions.

Personally, 'Release Control' is DRM that I can tolerate.

Edit: Spelling

Modifié par BigJas, 14 mars 2011 - 07:38 .

[Domcor]

voteDC wrote...
The thing that puzzles me is that the pirates were playing this before release day but those who did buy the game had to wait to play it.

They weren't.

The crack came out after the release check succeeded on the 8th.

Before then, the pirates were sitting on completely useless clones of the dvd.

Whatever you want to call it, the release control software worked perfectly.

[Kloreep]

Domcor wrote...

Whatever you want to call it, the release control software worked perfectly.

Indeed.

Inherent vulnerabilities of most DRM is that anyone who buys a legitimate copy has a working version to examine and tinker with, and all the time in the world in which to do so. And thus arises the legitimate complaint that not only is DRM a hassle for paying customers, it is a needless one.
Taking advantage of good encryption to seal it up tight - made possible by limiting the scope of enforcement to "until the release date" - is a much stronger idea that, properly implemented, will actually work, because neither of those vulnerabilities then apply. Conceptually, at least, Release Control seems to me to be one of the best forms of DRM, at least on the count of "but is this actually going to stop piracy?" It won't stop piracy, but it will make sure the pirates aren't playing sooner than the customers. The furor over the implementation is unfortunate, but it seems to me this is an idea any PC publisher has good reason to be interested in.

Of course, for the people who had trouble due to firewalls and such, "worked perfectly" doesn't really apply. But "it will never work 100% of the time" is a problem for just about any form of DRM; the only way around that is to not have it.

There is also the "what happens some years from now question." I'm hoping that patches will completely remove it, since I see no reason they can't. If that's not the case, then I suppose that's two objections I still have to it.

Modifié par Kloreep, 14 mars 2011 - 08:24 .