june gloom on 30/8/2008 at 19:39
Case in point: Bioshock. Not one week after the game was out, it was cracked and people were playing it DRM-free. I'm fucking amazed it took 2K games so long to realize that the DRM was pointless and removed the activation limit altogether- though it still requires internet activation, which I guess is fair enough in light of a lack of, say, CD keys.
Yakoob on 30/8/2008 at 20:28
Cue in dethtoll with uneducated shockpost.
oh wait, too late
It's commonly said among devs that the first few days are the most crucial to blockbuster's success. Sure it may have only been one week, but how many copies has bioshock sold during this week (hint: a lot). The 2K devs themselves said, IIRC, that they reached their goal for how long it took to crack bio and it was all they needed and that the copy protection, albeit broken, has done it's job.
btw, am I cool like you guys now that I insulted someone?
redrain85 on 30/8/2008 at 21:47
Yes, but once the copy protection had been cracked, why cling to it for so long?
Because 2K, the publisher, is stupid and stubborn. Which is why things need to change.
And it's why I'm constantly torn as to whether to buy new games with DRM, or not. If I don't buy them, the publishers will just use that as another excuse not to support the PC platform. But if I do, I'm sending a message that it's okay to keep using DRM.
Still, I've come to the conclusion that publishers will continue to use DRM whether consumers revolt en masse, or not. The only solution - for now, until they finally give up - is to buy the game and then download a version with the DRM stripped away, or download a crack. It's a bit of a hassle, but less so than putting up with lame activation schemes.
SubJeff on 30/8/2008 at 22:08
Quote Posted by Yakoob
It's commonly said among devs that the first few days are the most crucial to blockbuster's success. Sure it may have only been one week, but how many copies has bioshock sold during this week (hint: a lot). The 2K devs themselves said, IIRC, that they reached their goal for how long it took to crack bio and it was all they needed and that the copy protection, albeit broken, has done it's job.
That's what they said yeah.
It's BS. BioShock was so hyped it was going to sell well anyway. a. Do you really think that anyone determined not to pay would just give in after 6 days? b. How many times can they do this before Protection Method Mk128 is cracked? And do you really expect every dev to get NEW protection methods to hold off against the crack?
The_Raven on 30/8/2008 at 23:09
Yeah, I think the reason why it took a week for Bioshock was because it was one of the first times the cracker groups had encountered that version of SecuROM.
doctorfrog on 30/8/2008 at 23:32
Quote Posted by Zillameth
Stardock's protection is just as futile as any other, because I could easily upload the patch somewhere and let everybody download it.
Actually, Stardock patches aren't tight little self-installing executables, they're archives that require the overmind application (Stardock Central, Impulse) to install them. The application itself phones home to make sure the mothership is cool with you installing the update. It's a less intrusive Steam, in that once the patch is installed, you never need to phone home again unless you install the app elsewhere, reinstall it on a fresh OS, or need a newer patch.
Even if you uploaded that archive to the whole of the internet, they'll have to authenticate it same as you.
Stardock has admitted that this isn't a Fort Knox approach, but it's intended instead to curb 'casual' piracy.
Silkworm on 30/8/2008 at 23:40
I don't think its fair to expect that every developer have to run a server farm for re-downloading entire games. I mean that's a nice thing, but adding in a point like that basically makes this "bill of rights" an advertisement for Stardock's business model.
Quote Posted by addink
I'd rather see more demos.
I try to avoid buying games without having tried the demo. But it seems like demos are becoming old fashioned. Especially for hyped AAA titles, where it sometimes feels as if they purposely skip the demo to avoid bursting the bubble.
Thank you, I was about to bring this up.
Silkworm on 30/8/2008 at 23:44
Quote Posted by dethtoll
We shouldn't need bugfixes. Additional
content is another matter.
It's the other way around. No software will ever be perfect, bug fixes will
always be needed after the game - or any type of software product - is released. However, many games are essentially feature complete when released, or feature mod communities large enough to easily fill in any gaps. It's unreasonable to expect that every game needs additional content (or that every developer could provide it), but it's perfectly reasonable to expect that every software product will need some bugfixes.
ZylonBane on 31/8/2008 at 00:25
Quote Posted by Silkworm
I don't think its fair to expect that every developer have to run a server farm for re-downloading entire games.
My interpretation of that particular "right" is that if you downloaded the game in the first place, there should be no restrictions on re-downloading it. Which is perfectly sensible.
jay pettitt on 31/8/2008 at 09:58
Something else that bugs me is activation codes. I tend to chuck packaging out with the recycling because my home is not a great big store for Activision's assorted cardboard box fetishes and then at some random point in the future when I discover that there was some code thing that I needed Activision the big arsehats are all hahaha no we won't issue you with a new number serves you right you'll have to buy the whole product again at full cost and I'm like hahaha I don't think so Doom3 wasn't so good that I'm gonna buy it twice you dipshits, infact I don't think I'll be purchasing from you in the near future either if that's your attitude...
If you gotta have 'em print them on the CD.
