3659 réponses à ce sujet

[Nathander Von Eric]

Some people think that some of us won't buy Mass Effect 3 out of some kind of altruistic need to stop EA.

I'm not buying Mass Effect 3 because I don't know enough about Origin, how it operates, what it scans and exactly what kind of information is being sent back to EA and then on to others.

I personally don't care if every other person on the planet buys ME3.

The only reason I keep returning to this thread is because I hold some vain hope that answers or data will be revealed that will change my mind about Origin.

[Ottemis]

Honestly, since all the information and explanations by dmex it's difficult to find a valid argument against Origin other than "it's not optional". Whether or not one chooses to trust these answers is a separate matter altogether.
But whatever floats your boat (or doesn't), I'm happy either way as it stands.

Good to see you back dmex =)

Modifié par Ottemis, 22 janvier 2012 - 03:35 .

[charmingcharlie]

Ottemis wrote...

Honestly, since all the information and explanations by dmex it's difficult to find a valid argument against Origin other than "it's not optional". Whether or not one chooses to trust these answers is a separate matter altogether.
But whatever floats your boat (or doesn't), I'm happy either way as it stands.

Good to see you back dmex =)

Personally I would say it still comes down to trust.  it doesn't matter how much dmex tries and "bigs" up EA's side of things.  I do not trust EA enough to allow them the privilege of installing a DD client to my PC.  I still remember an EA that tried to get us to pay extra just so we could download our games for longer than 6 months (policy was eventually dropped). 

The story of EA forum bannings are still fresh in my mind and how that leads to you losing all your games.  Now I am never going to get banned from an EA forum but I have to question the motives of a company that practices that kind of policy.

In short EA's history gives me absolutely no reason whatsoever to trust them and until I can trust them there is no way I am allowing Origin on my PC.

[NubXL]

Ottemis should be hired on as an official EA cheerleader. I've been posting/lurking on both versions of this thread and he/she stops at nothing to promote EA and EA's warez. If you're not already on the payroll, you should be.

[Adugan]

NubXL wrote...
EA's warez

You mean Biowarez?

[dmex]

 

charmingcharlie wrote... 

The story of EA forum bannings are still fresh in my mind and how that leads to you losing all your games.  Now I am never going to get banned from an EA forum but I have to question the motives of a company that practices that kind of policy.

We don't practice that policy, Forum bans no longer affect your ability to use Origin or play online 

[charmingcharlie]

dmex wrote...   We don't practice that policy, Forum bans no longer affect your ability to use Origin or play online 

Doesn't change the fact that EA did practice that policy, nor does it change the fact EA were still practicing that policy nearly a year after the first instances happened even after EA stated they would change things.

Just because EA now does things slightly differently (after a hell of a lot of noise was made about it) does not change the fact that the trust has been broken.  How am I supposed to trust a company that thought a policy of forum banning = loss of games is acceptable ?

[Forbidden]

dmex wrote...

Pupuppu wrote...
Does Origin gather any information about other software installed on my
computer (e.g. Sofware from Adobe, Microsoft, NikSofware, ...)? 

 

No, We do not collect information from software installed on your machine.

I would recommend anyone reading this not take this statement at face value.  The EULA specifically grants the rights to EA to collect information on your "operating system, software, and software usage".    They specifically put wording into the EULA that would allow them to do this.

Also, half of the Origin problem is not just what's in it now, but what may be added in the future.  They can change Origin to do whatever they want it to do in the future and you are forced to either suck it up or lose access to the games you paid for.

[dmex]

charmingcharlie wrote...

dmex wrote...   We don't practice that policy, Forum bans no longer affect your ability to use Origin or play online 

Doesn't change the fact that EA did practice that policy, nor does it change the fact EA were still practicing that policy nearly a year after the first instances happened even after EA stated they would change things.

Just because EA now does things slightly differently (after a hell of a lot of noise was made about it) does not change the fact that the trust has been broken.  How am I supposed to trust a company that thought a policy of forum banning = loss of games is acceptable ?

Privacy issues, and both sides of a story – sometimes on the bans as an example, the person banned does not tell the entire story of why they were banned, but because of privacy issues we can not disclose those reasons.

In most cases they were warned first. Remember situations like saying the “this is a 'badass' game” may be a positive comment, but not appropriate for a 13 yr old (all EA forums and communities are PG13), if the poster repeatedly uses the language that for them is fine, but not that 13 yr old, they would get banned and we can not say this was the posters 3 warning or whatever.

The original problem was two-fold, firstly, you agree to a single code-of-conduct that applies to all EA services, breaking this agreement (abuse, swearing etc..) means you broke that agreement for all these services and thus not permitted to use any service.

The second problem was of a technical nature based on the legal terms in the original code-of-conduct, there was only a single bit (true, false) controlling your banned status across all services.

We have been 're-tooling' all our sites and systems to incorporate multiple banned flags so you're only banned from the individual community or product. These changes have been going on for quite some time now (well over 300 different systems required code changes, reviewing, legal review etc..) and is almost complete. There will also be a policy announcement about the newer banning policy when the 're-tooling' is complete.

The original policy was bad for users and worse for staff, you can imagine how us staff have had to endure when something like Bioware verifying my contracting status with EA resulted with me being banned, you where even locked out of internal systems in the meantime 

Modifié par dmex, 22 janvier 2012 - 05:56 .

[dmex]

Forbidden wrote...
I would recommend anyone reading this not take this statement at face value.  The EULA specifically grants the rights to EA to collect information on your "operating system, software, and software usage".    They specifically put wording into the EULA that would allow them to do this.

Also, half of the Origin problem is not just what's in it now, but what may be added in the future.

There's a law here in Australia that requires taxi drivers to carry a bale of hay in their trunk, they don't do it because it's stupid and would anger the customer if they needed to use the trunk for transporting their stuff.

We want Origin to be used to transport our stuff not your stuff. 

Forbidden wrote... 
They can change Origin to do whatever they want it to do in the future and you are forced to either suck it up or lose access to the games you paid for. 

 

You can say the exact same about any product from any company, thats just FUD.

[craigdolphin]

Demx, first, apologies for thinking you were a troll earlier. It was a bit confusing there for a while.

Secondly, I hope ea are paying you well. You've done more to build trust in origin for me than anything any marketing-laden response could have done. Straight answers in an timely manner are great to see.

I believe you when you say origin is behaving nicely now. And while I do not have the technical knowledge to determine whether your explanation about the earlier behavior being a bug is right or not, your manner of straight talking makes me inclined to believe you.

I still would like to see the Eula amended to permit an opt out for sharing data with EA. And seeing ea's new policy position on bans etc will be very helpful. I greatly appreciate your answering the question about how origin will react in the event that we refuse future changes to the Eula/TOS too. It would be really nice to see EA explicitly state that the current behavior, as described by you, will be their official policy. People should continue to have access to single player games they've paid for without fearing losing their investment because EA changes their legalese later.

Lastly, I should mention that EA really should have been upfront about the retooling process and timeline with the reporters who have been writing articles about the bans. EA would have looked a lot better had they simply said 'you know, we never thought abou this issue before. We have a binary ban system and it turns out we need to implement something more granular in scope. To do this, we're going to have to retool over 300 systems. With testing etc, it's going to take some time (months) to do as we don't want to break the whole system for all players that depend on it. But we are committed to doing it and we fully agree that forum bans should not affect single player games'

Something like that would have gone a long way towards solving EA's pr problem from these incidents.

As an aside, what the heck is it with the gaming industry about everything being a freaking top secret? Why can't company's just give straight answers to customer questions? Even sales figures are rated like state secrets. No other content industry hides its sales data whether it be books, movies, tv shows, music, whatever. Even things as obvious as mass effect being a trilogy, and therefore me3 was going to be made, didn't prevent bioware treating me3 as speculation right up until the official announcement. Really? It all just seems so darned childish sometimes. And things like the origin bundling, and previous drm controversies, the lack of an output clause int he Eula, why the heck do they do these kinds of things that smack of hostility towards their paying customers? Sure they want t make money, and good for them if they do, but why this ongoing attempt to keep the paying customers in the dark over almost everything?

I love Bioware's games (da2 less so) but sometimes I hate the company that makes them. It feels a bit like an abusive relationship at times. Nonetheless, if an opt out clause is added I will be buying me3 new for pc, and likely new for Xbox too.

[devSin]

I hope this at least means we won't have the stupid account log-in prompt from within the game anymore (which will break one day, and stay broken for months before anybody bothers to fix it).

I still hold my breath a bit sometimes when it's connecting, wondering if it's going to work or if it's going to go on the fritz again.

Modifié par devSin, 22 janvier 2012 - 07:07 .

[Gatt9]

dmex wrote...

The original problem was two-fold, firstly, you agree to a single code-of-conduct that applies to all EA services, breaking this agreement (abuse, swearing etc..) means you broke that agreement for all these services and thus not permitted to use any service.

The second problem was of a technical nature based on the legal terms in the original code-of-conduct, there was only a single bit (true, false) controlling your banned status across all services.

I have to point out,  those legal terms in the CoC,  ToS,  or EULA?  They've never been tested.  There's never been a reason for all of that legal-mumbo-jumbo to undergo legal proceedings for a video game,  again excepting copyright infringement.  I personally have great doubts about whether or not EA's origin EULA would withstand a legal proceeding.

Especially since the existing legislation on click-wrap agreements and EULA's is that it may constitute a contract,  not that it does constitute one.

Never mind the fact that you have to prove who clicked "I agree" in the first place,  because I guarantee you 95% of the people will claim a 6 year old clicked it,  since even if it is a contract,  no one under the age of 18 can agree to it,  and the company will have to prove who clicked "I agree" and that they were legally permitted to do so.  Because computers don't check your biometrics to verify your age prior to installing software,  nor does it check with an adult first.

[Archaven]

NubXL wrote...

Ottemis should be hired on as an official EA cheerleader. I've been posting/lurking on both versions of this thread and he/she stops at nothing to promote EA and EA's warez. If you're not already on the payroll, you should be.

It's not something new that i once read in some gaming news site that Bioware staff caught posting god-worshipping reviews of their own games while bad-mouthing others.

[dmex]

craigdolphin wrote...

Demx, first, apologies for thinking you were a troll earlier. It was a bit confusing there for a while.

Secondly, I hope ea are paying you well. You've done more to build trust in origin for me than anything any marketing-laden response could have done. Straight answers in an timely manner are great to see.

 

Thanks, I appreciate the feedback 

craigdolphin wrote... 

I believe you when you say origin is behaving nicely now. And while I do not have the technical knowledge to determine whether your explanation about the earlier behavior being a bug is right or not, your manner of straight talking makes me inclined to believe you. 

Lastly, I should mention that EA really should have been upfront about the retooling process and timeline with the reporters who have been writing articles about the bans. EA would have looked a lot better had they simply said 'you know, we never thought abou this issue before. We have a binary ban system and it turns out we need to implement something more granular in scope. To do this, we're going to have to retool over 300 systems. With testing etc, it's going to take some time (months) to do as we don't want to break the whole system for all players that depend on it. But we are committed to doing it and we fully agree that forum bans should not affect single player games'

Something like that would have gone a long way towards solving EA's pr problem from these incidents.

As an aside, what the heck is it with the gaming industry about everything being a freaking top secret? Why can't company's just give straight answers to customer questions?

Personally, I don't know why the re-tooling process is considered top-secret. It is something that would go a very long way to reassure everyone that we're working to resolve the problem, Hopefully I don't get in trouble for  explaining the issues and the re-tooling process on Monday though   

Just beware that until the official announcement,  you can still lose access to playing online with _some_ games for the duration of a ban.

dmex

[Ottemis]

Archaven wrote...

NubXL wrote...

Ottemis should be hired on as an official EA cheerleader. I've been posting/lurking on both versions of this thread and he/she stops at nothing to promote EA and EA's warez. If you're not already on the payroll, you should be.

It's not something new that i once read in some gaming news site that Bioware staff caught posting god-worshipping reviews of their own games while bad-mouthing others.

Oh, I'm sorry, should I be miserable about all this and shake my fist at the sky?
I like to believe EA isn't the devil come to drag me down to hell. If you want to compare that to me waving pompoms around while you guys FEAR they will, whavever floats your boat.
Plainly put, I'm a glass half full kinda gal, if you feel a need to judge me for it or pull wild assumptions about how that means i'm not normal, that's rather sad don't you think?

[Lumikki]

Nathander Von Eric wrote...

Some people think that some of us won't buy Mass Effect 3 out of some kind of altruistic need to stop EA.

Some maybe, what I think is silly. But I think most of "us" don't buy for a few reason.

1. They don't want to use Origin client (or any other digital distribution software)
2. They don't like how Origin client collects data (ANY) without asking permission from the player.
 ( Important here is giving player option to choose is data collected, it's not about what data is collected)
3. Some players wants to buy they games in Steam, because they don't want second distribution software into they computer.

Modifié par Lumikki, 22 janvier 2012 - 09:44 .

[didymos1120]

Archaven wrote...

It's not something new that i once read in some gaming news site that Bioware staff caught posting god-worshipping reviews of their own games while bad-mouthing others.

All I remember was that there was one guy who did that with DA2 on one site (Metacritic), and it's not like there was evidence that he did so with official approval.  To all appearances, it was just someone feeling defensive about DA2's reception who did something dumb.

[Ahglock]

dmex wrote...

Forbidden wrote...
I would recommend anyone reading this not take this statement at face value.  The EULA specifically grants the rights to EA to collect information on your "operating system, software, and software usage".    They specifically put wording into the EULA that would allow them to do this.

Also, half of the Origin problem is not just what's in it now, but what may be added in the future.

There's a law here in Australia that requires taxi drivers to carry a bale of hay in their trunk, they don't do it because it's stupid and would anger the customer if they needed to use the trunk for transporting their stuff.

We want Origin to be used to transport our stuff not your stuff. 

Forbidden wrote... 
They can change Origin to do whatever they want it to do in the future and you are forced to either suck it up or lose access to the games you paid for. 

 

You can say the exact same about any product from any company, thats just FUD.

Why is the giant boxes of sand so bad to talk about and a violation of origin usage then?  If they didn't want to datamine with their spyware why do they make it against the rules to stop them from datamining your computer, why is the opt out a mass effect opt out and not a general opt out?  They seem to be going out of there way to make sure they can screw me over at the drop of a hat for people who don't want to screw me over.

[Lumikki]

dmex wrote...

Forbidden wrote...
I would recommend anyone reading this not take this statement at face value.  The EULA specifically grants the rights to EA to collect information on your "operating system, software, and software usage".    They specifically put wording into the EULA that would allow them to do this.

Also, half of the Origin problem is not just what's in it now, but what may be added in the future.

There's a law here in Australia that requires taxi drivers to carry a bale of hay in their trunk, they don't do it because it's stupid and would anger the customer if they needed to use the trunk for transporting their stuff.

We want Origin to be used to transport our stuff not your stuff.

What is THIS OUR STUFF?

My computers screen resolution is my stuff. Information as what OS I use is my stuff. Only your stuff what exist is mostly in directory where your software is installed. You made the stuff, it hasn't changed, so why you need to transfer it back to you?

If you talk game softwares DRM key exchange then that's other thing. Yes, some information need to transmited for your digital copywrites, but what Origin clients data collection ability has to do with it?

Most of what is listed as data collection in you Origin client EULA is NOT YOUR STUFF.  It may belong some other company, but it's not yours. Example list what stuff exist in my computer doesn't belong to you. Information what we software users creates with softwares is not your stuff anymore. Only your companies owned software stuff is yours.

Forbidden wrote... 
They can change Origin to do whatever they want it to do in the future and you are forced to either suck it up or lose access to the games you paid for. 

 

You can say the exact same about any product from any company, thats just FUD.

Only with digital distribution situation and internet based DRM checks. You can't stop retail games working if they don't require internet based DRM check. These would work even after the company who made the game is long gone.

Point been, bundle software what rules can be changed, what is't really even the game. Is risky for the consumer, because it's fully in YOUR CONTROL and you ask us to trust you. How have you earned that trust, when we look why even this thread exists here.

Modifié par Lumikki, 22 janvier 2012 - 09:52 .

[Bostur]

dmex wrote...

The original problem was two-fold, firstly, you agree to a single code-of-conduct that applies to all EA services, breaking this agreement (abuse, swearing etc..) means you broke that agreement for all these services and thus not permitted to use any service.

Thats probably the essence of the disagreement. EA considered and maybe still considers the games they sell as their service. But many of us consumers see _our_ games as _our_ stuff and don't accept it if an outside force wants to remain in control. After all thats how it has worked for decades. And those are the terms that other pieces copyrighted materials are sold by.

It's common that people who get banned only tell part of the story, but the thing that resulted in the distrust was EAs intention to control products they had already sold. Consumers need an awful lot of trust to accept this kind of DRM, an amount of trust that large corporations rarely get, and maybe shouldn't need. It certainly does seem strange when EA asks for that kind of trust for physical copies of a game.

Also keep in mind the original versions of the EULA that clearly stated that EA had the intention of disabling games if the account had been inactive for 2 years. I certainly understand if people are wary about trusting EA with the keys to their game library.

[Troodon80]

SovereignWillReturn wrote...

Now Steam is ultra popular by everyone. Yeah, Origin is all WUT UP in your face, but it won't be as bad as you think, from whta dmex has said, it looks to be almost exactly like Steam.

Let's all just chill and play our fav games.

Again, people make the assumption that everyone is fine with Steam, but not with Origin. I hate both equally. Both Steam and Origin are great and wonderful for those with a good internet connection, and for those that don't? Oh, well it's simply a matter of saying "up yours." That's a nice way of treating potential customers (and loyal fans alike).

My questions revolving the need to download anything during installation, or the ability to download patches as .exe files from the BSN, still hasn't been answered.

@Dmex, do you think you could take a stab at answering them, please?

[Forbidden]

dmex wrote...

Forbidden wrote...
I would recommend anyone reading this not take this statement at face value.  The EULA specifically grants the rights to EA to collect information on your "operating system, software, and software usage".    They specifically put wording into the EULA that would allow them to do this.

Also, half of the Origin problem is not just what's in it now, but what may be added in the future.

There's a law here in Australia that requires taxi drivers to carry a bale of hay in their trunk, they don't do it because it's stupid and would anger the customer if they needed to use the trunk for transporting their stuff.

We want Origin to be used to transport our stuff not your stuff.

I don't know if you're following a corporate line or simply naive.  Do you honestly believe that there aren't marketing middle managers interested in what programs people have on their machines?   When middle managers talk about datamining, it's in tones that can only be described as lust. 

Forbidden wrote... 
They can change Origin to do whatever they want it to do in the future and you are forced to either suck it up or lose access to the games you paid for. 

 

You can say the exact same about any product from any company, thats just FUD.

Most software doesn't contain a remote killswitch.  Origin is a remote killswitch.  EA can can ban an account and next time Origin logs in, it can revoke the permission to run every piece of software it controls.  You can't run it offline, since it already revoked your games.  You can't install from physical media, because the physical media requires Origin to login and verify.

That's what Origin is:  Control.  Not for the user, but for EA.

Modifié par Forbidden, 22 janvier 2012 - 09:54 .

[Ottemis]

TankingTick wrote...

Dear Dmex,

Can you or EA give a definitive answer on whether sandboxing Origin is allowed, and if not, why?

He's said this about the subject before:

dmex wrote...

hotedge wrote...
@dmex regardless of how origin operates now (bug or no bug) how running origin in a silicon container is circumventing its DRM after all you being on the EA Security Risk Management Team

Sandboxing Origin is not circumventing the DRM, as it doesn't interfere with the DRM in such way that allows you to bypass it.

Modifié par Ottemis, 22 janvier 2012 - 10:03 .