3659 réponses à ce sujet

[Zeju]

I'm dead serious Luvinn.

And billy, I'm not bias I'm frustrated by the stupidity people are showing, blinding beliving what people say instead of going and finding out for themselves what Origin does, like I and a few others have done.

Modifié par Zeju, 22 janvier 2012 - 06:15 .

[Aaleel]

billy the squid wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

Was it decided if Sandboxing counts as DRM circumvention or not?

It's not. dmex stated it as much, Bogsnot has explained the tech issues as well  and I've babbled on about the legal differentiation.

Well it seems that I may have some testing to do.

[wolfsite]

Tortugueta wrote...

dmex wrote...

Tortugueta wrote...
Is that official? I mean, is there a document or an official statment that clearly shows that this is in fact the source of the disagreement between Valve and EA? Because they where talking about a "set". Although I suppose it could be that all the elements in the set revolve arround the very same issue.

Yes, An offical statement can be found here: 
http://forum.ea.com/...st/7468888.page 

Well, after going through that and also this other post, I must say that I am still at a loss. I apologize if I am being too insistent, but could someone from EA or Bioware please elaborate on the offending terms? Because all I have read so far is pretty vague. What is it exactly that EA/Bioware want to do and Steam does not allow? It would be really nice if some spokesperson from EA or Bioware would care to clearly and precisely explain what the problem is, because otherwise this is beginning to feel like a really lame excuse to pull us to Origin.

I believe the problem is that Valve wants everything done using Steam meaning that EA can't supply content to gamers without using it.  That would mean all content would have to be approved by Valve/Steam before the user can get access to it (I know this is the case as this routine has delayed content several times for Steam users).  One example would be if a patch was released, they could get it out right away however it could get delayed by Valve before Steam users can get access to it.

Also there are rumours going around that you would only be able to get your content from Steam if you aquired your game from them meaning you are locked into them for your content, so if a sale or special happenned on another site you would not be able to take advantage of it.

I have read people who got games like Dead Rising 2 on Steam but they could not get DLC they purchased from non Steam stores to authenticate on the Steam version meaning they lost money on the purchase and they could not use the content.

Please don't qoute me on this and if someone can find info the proves otherwise that would be great as I currently don't have 100% evidence aside from posts I have read up on forums and some personal experience in Steam.

[Furtled]

Zeju wrote...
And billy, I'm not bias I'm frustrated by the stupidity people are showing, blinding beliving what people say instead of going and finding out for themselves what Origin does, like I and a few others have done.

I understand your frustration because there's all manner of half truths and conspiracy theories floating around about this, but I would ask you to try and understand that many people do understand what the Origin client does and still have issues with it. It doesn't make them stupid, wrong, tin foil hat wearers or anything else, just people with a different stance on personal privacy to you.

[Severyx]

Ottemis wrote...

Severyx wrote...

Contractors working in the line of work that dmex is in generally have to sign confidentiality forms. Companies have to keep their IPs and other technology safe, with good reason. I would not be in the least bit surprised if dmex has since lost his job. If I were EA and I had not authorized the discussion of Origin's inner workings, I'd fire him too. What he did may have helped some number of players understand the deal, but it likely cost him his job. That's not EA being jerks, that's standard operating procedure under contract.

So, are we going to wait to see whether he'll lose his job, or are we going to assume he's not an idiot.
I mean, being hired by a company like EA does suggest some level of intelligence doesn't it.
I'd rather think EA would have responded by now had he breached his contract.

I swear, the amount of nonsensical highly unlikely and hypothetic statements in this thread are making my head spin.
Think straight?

So have you ever held a technology related job? Obviously not. These are not hypothetical statements, nor are they nonsensical. This is called 'Industry Experience' and 'IT politics', something you obviously lack knowledge of, given your post. We might not know if EA has done something about this, as they most certainly have the power to take care of this behind the scenes.

Title does not dictate actions, though companies would like it to be that way. People break NDAs all the time. For dmex, however, the stakes are a little higher than 'losing access to the beta'. It was quite a risk he took, talking about what he did. A lot of us appreciate it.

Back on topic.

Wait, what's considered on-topic? This thread's been derailed for quite a while.

[Zeju]

But in all honesty, being aware of what Origin does, it is no threat to personal privacy, so I dont understand this panic.

[DRUNK_CANADIAN]

Aaleel wrote...

Was it decided if Sandboxing counts as DRM circumvention or not?

I think they would have a tough time enforcing it as a means to terminate useage.

[Furtled]

Zeju wrote...
But in all honesty, being aware of what Origin does, it is no threat to personal privacy, so I dont understand this panic.

It's no threat to your personal privacy, it is to mine. Our ideas of personal privacy differ, no one idea is correct or better. Origin removes my choice to allow EA to collect and use my data; you're not bothered by that, which is fine, I am. I don't expect you or anyone else to agree and I'm not calling anyone who doesn't stupid.
Hope that makes some sense and if you want to understand more this article is worth a look.

Modifié par Furtled, 22 janvier 2012 - 06:51 .

[Gatt9]

dmex wrote...

Bostur wrote...
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.

Funny thing with Valve and Steam, You're a subscriber to the games you purchased, you do not own them. There's also this interesting section relating to your online conduct: "You acknowledge that Valve is not required to provide you notice before terminating your Subscriptions(s) and/or Account, but it may choose to do so."

The only recent game that I'm aware of where a forum ban was able to prevent you from playing was Battlefield 3 since you need to logon to Battlelog to start single player, most who got banned didn't realize or ask about how you could put Origin in offline mode and still play these games 

With all due respect,  we're once again coming back around to the problem that none of this has ever been tested or upheld by a court.  At this point,  none of what the EULA says means anything. 

Because a service,  as far as the products execution goes,  is not being provided.  It won't take more than 2 minutes to demonstrate that,  none of the game's code is executed on any computer owned by Steam or EA,  it's all being executed on the consumer's computer.  The only service provided is the transmission of the files,  which are then stored on the user's computer,  and executed on the user's computer.

So honestly,  they can put whatever they want in there,  but that doesn't make it true,  or legally binding.  Truth is,  both Steam and EA's EULA's would be thrown out of court because they couldn't show any service being provided during the execution of the game,  only in the transfer of the game.

Nor could they demonstrate any reason why the game's code requires a connection to their servers to execute.  "Because he might be a pirate!" isn't going to hold up in a courtroom either.  DRM is not necessary for the game's code to execute.

As a contrast,  look at an MMORPG where a service is provided,  and where game code is executed on the company's computers.  There,  a service is provided,  and revocation of the right to play the game is legal.

In short,  EA (And Steam) can call it whatever they want,  but that does not make it true,  valid,  or legal.

[Ahglock]

Gatt9 wrote...



With all due respect,  we're once again coming back around to the problem that none of this has ever been tested or upheld by a court.  At this point,  none of what the EULA says means anything. 

Because a service,  as far as the products execution goes,  is not being provided.  It won't take more than 2 minutes to demonstrate that,  none of the game's code is executed on any computer owned by Steam or EA,  it's all being executed on the consumer's computer.  The only service provided is the transmission of the files,  which are then stored on the user's computer,  and executed on the user's computer.

As a side note most if not all hard copy games claim to be a revocable licesne and not actual ownership, so what steam says is not really that much different than what every game claims when you buy them.  And it is highly doubtful that would actually hold up very well in court as well.  

[Gatt9]

Furtled wrote...

Zeju wrote...
But in all honesty, being aware of what Origin does, it is no threat to personal privacy, so I dont understand this panic.

It's no threat to your personal privacy, it is to mine. Our ideas of personal privacy differ, no one idea is correct or better. Origin removes my choice to allow EA to collect and use my data; you're not bothered by that, which is fine, I am. I don't expect you or anyone else to agree and I'm not calling anyone who doesn't stupid.
Hope that makes some sense and if you want to understand more this article is worth a look.

I strongly suspect a significant number of "I have nothing to hide",  comes from very young people who have not yet experienced how the world works.

I suspect that once they or a friend doesn't get a job,  or loses a job,  thanks to Facebook,  they will start to understand.  Because right now,  there's companies out there that do nothing but accumulate your personal data on the internet,  and sell it to prospective employers. 

Keep in mind,  we're on a video game forum.  More than a few of the people arguing are quite possibly in junior highschool. 

[Tortugueta]

wolfsite wrote...

Please don't qoute me on this and if someone can find info the proves otherwise that would be great as I currently don't have 100% evidence aside from posts I have read up on forums and some personal experience in Steam.

That is exactly what I'm complaining about. Everything is too vague to make a proper judgement. If things are like you suggest they might be, then EA/Bioware would have a point. As I said in a previous post, Steam clients should not be locked in to Steam when it comes to aquire additional content or patches for their Steam games, but they certainly should have the option of getting that very same content from Steam if they wish so.

That of course has nothing to do with EA/Bioware forcing us to go through Origin, which I disapprove completely and unconditionally.

Modifié par Tortugueta, 22 janvier 2012 - 07:30 .

[NubXL]

It's very nice to see that EA has someone on staff who doesn't speak in vague corporate labyrinth. Hopefully nothing bad happens to him as a result of being helpful.

[wolfsite]

Tortugueta wrote...

wolfsite wrote...

Please don't qoute me on this and if someone can find info the proves otherwise that would be great as I currently don't have 100% evidence aside from posts I have read up on forums and some personal experience in Steam.

That is exactly what I'm complaining about. Everything is too vague to make a proper judgement. If things are like you suggest they might be, then EA/Bioware would have a point. As I said in a previous post, Steam clients should not be locked in to Steam when it comes to aquire additional content or patches for their Steam games, but they certainly should have the option of getting that very same content from Steam if they wish so.

That of course has nothing to do with EA/Bioware forcing us to go through Origin, which I disapprove completely and unconditionally.

I do know for Fact that Valve wants all patches and content updates done using Steam only.  So from this EA does have a point in that they can't just send a patch or quick fix out right away, they would have to send it to Valve/Steam and wait for them to approve upload it.  I just don't know 100% if that means you can not use Non Steam DLC content on a game purchased with Steam or using Steamworks.

[Yuoaman]

wolfsite wrote...

Tortugueta wrote...

wolfsite wrote...

Please don't qoute me on this and if someone can find info the proves otherwise that would be great as I currently don't have 100% evidence aside from posts I have read up on forums and some personal experience in Steam.

That is exactly what I'm complaining about. Everything is too vague to make a proper judgement. If things are like you suggest they might be, then EA/Bioware would have a point. As I said in a previous post, Steam clients should not be locked in to Steam when it comes to aquire additional content or patches for their Steam games, but they certainly should have the option of getting that very same content from Steam if they wish so.

That of course has nothing to do with EA/Bioware forcing us to go through Origin, which I disapprove completely and unconditionally.

I do know for Fact that Valve wants all patches and content updates done using Steam only.  So from this EA does have a point in that they can't just send a patch or quick fix out right away, they would have to send it to Valve/Steam and wait for them to approve upload it.  I just don't know 100% if that means you can not use Non Steam DLC content on a game purchased with Steam or using Steamworks.

No, that's not it at all.

Valve wants them on Steam in addition to wherever they're sold - they don't need them to be Steam-exclusive.

[DTKT]

Yuoaman wrote...

wolfsite wrote...

Tortugueta wrote...

wolfsite wrote...

Please don't qoute me on this and if someone can find info the proves otherwise that would be great as I currently don't have 100% evidence aside from posts I have read up on forums and some personal experience in Steam.

That is exactly what I'm complaining about. Everything is too vague to make a proper judgement. If things are like you suggest they might be, then EA/Bioware would have a point. As I said in a previous post, Steam clients should not be locked in to Steam when it comes to aquire additional content or patches for their Steam games, but they certainly should have the option of getting that very same content from Steam if they wish so.

That of course has nothing to do with EA/Bioware forcing us to go through Origin, which I disapprove completely and unconditionally.

I do know for Fact that Valve wants all patches and content updates done using Steam only.  So from this EA does have a point in that they can't just send a patch or quick fix out right away, they would have to send it to Valve/Steam and wait for them to approve upload it.  I just don't know 100% if that means you can not use Non Steam DLC content on a game purchased with Steam or using Steamworks.

No, that's not it at all.

Valve wants them on Steam in addition to wherever they're sold - they don't need them to be Steam-exclusive.

This man is correct.

[DashRunner92]

Zeju wrote...

Hey. People.

Steam sucks. Get over it.

I didnt want Steam on my PC for Modern Warfare, I didnt want it for Empire Total War, I didnt want it for DoW 2, the only thing it's done for me is screw me around and screw up my games, and the amount of people on the Valve forums that can say the same is staggering.

Anyway just because I don't like Steam doesnt mean I was automatically gonna like Origin. Buut I'm not stupid enough to think it's Spyware, I've had monitors watch Origin and it only ever scans the Origin folder, nothing else, so all panic is hearsay and completely unfounded.

On that logic, I decided it wasnt a problem, and I read that there was DLC bonus with Kingdoms of Amalur for a Steam/Origin downloaded demo that was linked to your EA account, and guess what, I downloaded Origin, installed it, downloaded Amalur demo, installed, played, no problems. Get over it. It's not Spyware. It's better then Steam.

Oh and take my word for it, I HATE EA, absoloutely HATE them, look at EA Sports and what they did to the FIFA Series on PC, so the fact that I'm supporting in this issue.. It says alot.

It's a bunch of hysteria and people who are taking other peoples word for it. Download a Process Manager and watch Origin work for yourself, there's no danger in it. At all.

I love how you say Steam sucks but you fail to name any real reasons why. Modern Warefare, Empire Total War, and DOW 2 are all games that don't even need Steam to play, so I don't see what that is all about. Also if the game on steam is screwing up, it's likely either you messed with the files through modding or that same problem would happen regardless if you installed it through a disc or through steam. 

Oh by the way, there are plenty of spywares that can't be detected through a process manager. 

Modifié par DashRunner92, 22 janvier 2012 - 08:51 .

[wolfsite]

DTKT wrote...

Yuoaman wrote...

wolfsite wrote...

Tortugueta wrote...

wolfsite wrote...

Please don't qoute me on this and if someone can find info the proves otherwise that would be great as I currently don't have 100% evidence aside from posts I have read up on forums and some personal experience in Steam.

That is exactly what I'm complaining about. Everything is too vague to make a proper judgement. If things are like you suggest they might be, then EA/Bioware would have a point. As I said in a previous post, Steam clients should not be locked in to Steam when it comes to aquire additional content or patches for their Steam games, but they certainly should have the option of getting that very same content from Steam if they wish so.

That of course has nothing to do with EA/Bioware forcing us to go through Origin, which I disapprove completely and unconditionally.

I do know for Fact that Valve wants all patches and content updates done using Steam only.  So from this EA does have a point in that they can't just send a patch or quick fix out right away, they would have to send it to Valve/Steam and wait for them to approve upload it.  I just don't know 100% if that means you can not use Non Steam DLC content on a game purchased with Steam or using Steamworks.

No, that's not it at all.

Valve wants them on Steam in addition to wherever they're sold - they don't need them to be Steam-exclusive.

This man is correct.

I have a few games I have purchased on Steam such as Prince of Persia, Quake and such.  Some of these I needed to get some patches not available on Steam to get them to run .  Few days it worked but then Steam did a file check and reverted the files to the ones in the Steam database making the games non playable again.  That indicates Steam doesn't like added files, though with stuff like Skyrim I would have to guess the developer would request Steam not make these checks as to not lose file information.  (Wish 2K would do this with Borderlands, every now and then Steam resets all my config edits which in turns cuts the quality of the game down).

[DashRunner92]

wolfsite wrote...

Tortugueta wrote...

wolfsite wrote...

Please don't qoute me on this and if someone can find info the proves otherwise that would be great as I currently don't have 100% evidence aside from posts I have read up on forums and some personal experience in Steam.

That is exactly what I'm complaining about. Everything is too vague to make a proper judgement. If things are like you suggest they might be, then EA/Bioware would have a point. As I said in a previous post, Steam clients should not be locked in to Steam when it comes to aquire additional content or patches for their Steam games, but they certainly should have the option of getting that very same content from Steam if they wish so.

That of course has nothing to do with EA/Bioware forcing us to go through Origin, which I disapprove completely and unconditionally.

I do know for Fact that Valve wants all patches and content updates done using Steam only.  So from this EA does have a point in that they can't just send a patch or quick fix out right away, they would have to send it to Valve/Steam and wait for them to approve upload it.  I just don't know 100% if that means you can not use Non Steam DLC content on a game purchased with Steam or using Steamworks.

You know they still have to do the approval method with patches and fixes on Xbox Live and PSN, but you don't see EA refusing to release games on the Xbox 360 and PS3.

[wolfsite]

DashRunner92 wrote...

wolfsite wrote...

Tortugueta wrote...

wolfsite wrote...

Please don't qoute me on this and if someone can find info the proves otherwise that would be great as I currently don't have 100% evidence aside from posts I have read up on forums and some personal experience in Steam.

That is exactly what I'm complaining about. Everything is too vague to make a proper judgement. If things are like you suggest they might be, then EA/Bioware would have a point. As I said in a previous post, Steam clients should not be locked in to Steam when it comes to aquire additional content or patches for their Steam games, but they certainly should have the option of getting that very same content from Steam if they wish so.

That of course has nothing to do with EA/Bioware forcing us to go through Origin, which I disapprove completely and unconditionally.

I do know for Fact that Valve wants all patches and content updates done using Steam only.  So from this EA does have a point in that they can't just send a patch or quick fix out right away, they would have to send it to Valve/Steam and wait for them to approve upload it.  I just don't know 100% if that means you can not use Non Steam DLC content on a game purchased with Steam or using Steamworks.

You know they still have to do the approval method with patches and fixes on Xbox Live and PSN, but you don't see EA refusing to release games on the Xbox 360 and PS3.

Mainly because there is no alternative way to get the stuff out.  X-Box and Playstation are closed systems, you have no choice but to go threw Microsoft and Sony to get content out.

[Ottemis]

Severyx wrote...
So have you ever held a technology related job? Obviously not. These are not hypothetical statements, nor are they nonsensical. This is called 'Industry Experience' and 'IT politics', something you obviously lack knowledge of, given your post.

I guess building this website for an African Filmfestival doesn't classify as a technology related job according to you, ok. I fail to see how this adds anything to the discussion.

What's funny about this is you assuming he will be fired while I'm assuming he won't be, for knowing what he can and can't discuss (which I brought up in the first place btw, not you). I was not disputing him being under contract limiting his 'freedom of speech', I was disputing your claims of it ending in inevitable doom and damnation. That you feel a need to again disagree with me disagreeing with you on that front has nothing to do with what he signed and everything to do with you, for some reason, missing the initial point. Yet again. It also has nothing to do with my 'lacking knowledge of IT politics or Industry Experience', so bringing it up only proves to me how severely you need to feel superior to others.

Modifié par Ottemis, 22 janvier 2012 - 08:58 .

[MingWolf]

Jim_uk wrote...

Well this is unfortunate, I loved the previous games but I won't have Origin on my PC. I stopped buying UbiSoft games when they started treating paying customers badly and I'm quite happy to do the same with E.A until they are willing to accept just money for their products rather than insisting on my private data as well.

I do what's needed on my PC to keep malware off it, I'm not going to give that up just a play a video game.

EA should read this and take note, this is what happens when you abuse paying customers... http://www.pcgamer.c...eath-of-reason/

Interesting read.  In a way, it's sad to see gamers just pack up and look elsewhere (even here) because in a lot of ways, I simply can't doubt the artistry and effort that goes into some of the titles we see today.  It is truly unfortunate that even game developers, who have become giant corporate entities these days, are simply myopic to the fact that they have completely ignored customer reactions to the way they are handling the piracy problem.  It seems as though developers like Ubisoft, and EA, are so bent on curbing piracy or controlling their own product they forget where their salaries come from. 

In addition to the failures of other publishers, EA should probably look at their own past.  I remember when Spore came out, it became pretty much the most pirated game in the world.  For anyone who cared to look at customer reactions, people kept blaming the DRM.  Just reading the amazon reviews on the game, pretty everyone cited DRM, and over 90% of the people there gave the game a 1/5 stars.  Shame, the game seemed quite creative and fun in a way (though I never had the tiime to to pick it up and play it). 

Though Origin may or may not be solely a DRM mechanism (whatever cross-platform capabilities seem nice?), it's hard to deny it's core purpose, especially when it is required for your game (Mass Effect 3) to function.  Not sure if this will tangibly affect ME3 sales, since there was so much traction that came from ME1, and ME2, but you never know.  Theres plenty of people who are probably not aware of Origin, or don't care, but I can imagine that if ME3 was not ME3 and just a standalone game, the potential would be out there for the game to flop. 

[DashRunner92]

wolfsite wrote...

DashRunner92 wrote...

wolfsite wrote...

Tortugueta wrote...

wolfsite wrote...

Please don't qoute me on this and if someone can find info the proves otherwise that would be great as I currently don't have 100% evidence aside from posts I have read up on forums and some personal experience in Steam.

That is exactly what I'm complaining about. Everything is too vague to make a proper judgement. If things are like you suggest they might be, then EA/Bioware would have a point. As I said in a previous post, Steam clients should not be locked in to Steam when it comes to aquire additional content or patches for their Steam games, but they certainly should have the option of getting that very same content from Steam if they wish so.

That of course has nothing to do with EA/Bioware forcing us to go through Origin, which I disapprove completely and unconditionally.

I do know for Fact that Valve wants all patches and content updates done using Steam only.  So from this EA does have a point in that they can't just send a patch or quick fix out right away, they would have to send it to Valve/Steam and wait for them to approve upload it.  I just don't know 100% if that means you can not use Non Steam DLC content on a game purchased with Steam or using Steamworks.

You know they still have to do the approval method with patches and fixes on Xbox Live and PSN, but you don't see EA refusing to release games on the Xbox 360 and PS3.

Mainly because there is no alternative way to get the stuff out.  X-Box and Playstation are closed systems, you have no choice but to go threw Microsoft and Sony to get content out.

No matter who you go through, there will always be an authorization process. That's how they make sure their is nothing harmful within the patches or anything that may break the system. Take Minecraft for example, the reason it took so long to get on Xbox live was because Notch wanted to be sure he could patch and update at will. 

[Hedera]

I've heard Steam doesn't really have an approval process for DLC/Patches. Or at least theirs is much less rigorous than XBL/PSN. Example: Skyrim patches come out for Xbox and such after they're approved, but the PC patches can come out when they're done.

[Pupuppu]

wolfsite wrote...

I believe the problem is that Valve wants everything done using Steam meaning that EA can't supply content to gamers without using it.  That would mean all content would have to be approved by Valve/Steam before the user can get access to it (I know this is the case as this routine has delayed content several times for Steam users).  One example would be if a patch was released, they could get it out right away however it could get delayed by Valve before Steam users can get access to it.

Of course this is not true. Steamworks also states this (patch when and how often you want).
A recent example for this would be Sword of the Stars II on Steam.
A negativ example would be the Xbox and PSN network that are delaying patches, i.e. EA Battlefield 3 for internal review (confirmed by EA).

Also there are rumours going around that you would only be able to get your content from Steam if you aquired your game from them meaning you are locked into them for your content, so if a sale or special happenned on another site you would not be able to take advantage of it.

That's why steam requires to have content patches on their site when you sell the base game their, makes sense.
Of course if the publisher is stupid enough to spread incompatible updates on various shopping sites to different base versions of the game I would reconsider business with this company.

I have read people who got games like Dead Rising 2 on Steam but they could not get DLC they purchased from non Steam stores to authenticate on the Steam version meaning they lost money on the purchase and they could not use the content.

Thank you for finally admitting that what Steam is doing is to protect their customers by requiring them to have their DLC also on steam when they sell the game there.
Though one must blame Capcom for releasing different versions of games that are incompatible with their DLC. No other GFWL game shares this problem, even DR2:OTR.