Far cry 2(bad news for pc)

[shaithis]

kalniel, why are you so insistent on trying to changes peoples view of DRM? A personal vested interest perhaps?

Many people HATE DRM, we hate the fact we can be in a situation where we cannot play the game we have purchased, we hate the fact it "calls home" and could have any number of potentially harmful payloads embedded within it.

If you are happy to accept it, then do so. The rest of us will do you a favour and continue to boycott as many games as possible that contain the nuisance. Todays DRM isn't too bad but if everyone accepts it, tomorrows will be as invasive as possible.........The day you find a rootkit on your PC, you may change your mind, unfortunately it may be too late by then.

As for a "right to protect your IP", as long as it does not effect the customer in any way at all, then fine. Unfortunately DRM can, and does, effect the customer.

[Olmy]

Whats the fuss about, EA=suck but this is UBI they dont own the world so they will care more than ea. WHo has needed a new license or what ever? i never heard anyone have issues(apart from me xD) but its a little issue, i already completed the game (crysis warhead) 2 times and the activation ONLY affects single player and for me multiplayer is where the longetivity is at.

You're locked out of your game, and at the mercy of the monkeys at EA customer support. That is a small issue?

I think shaithis hit the nail on the head here, a more concise, short description of my objections to draconian DRM .

[Hicks12]

You're locked out of your game, and at the mercy of the monkeys at EA customer support. That is a small issue?

I think shaithis hit the nail on the head here, a more concise, short description of my objections to draconian DRM .

I dont think you understood my point, i played the game and completed it(got bored) but i can STILL play the multiplayer which is what i buy most FPS games for now. Im not locked out my own game, i dont OWN the game. No one owns the game apart from the people with the rights, i have a license to use it but not own it so its just the same as a cd key. Online games are worse like guild wars, you can use ur cd key once for an account so to sell it on is useless and yet we are complaining over 5 installs that are TRANSFERABLE as u get them bk while unistalling and so you can sell it on if you get bored, see why DRM is BLOWN OUT OF PROPORTION



PS: sorry for all the caps etc, just annoying the amount of bitching going on in this forum recently(pes v fifa etc).

[dangel]

Huh, how can it kill your dvd drive when it allows you to run it off the hard drive?surely using the dvd drive less means it is less likely to break? I havent followed DRM much as its such a little bitchy subject so sorry if there is proof.

In the bad days of DRM, when StarForce walked the earth, that was the result for some people. It's actually a great example of how people complaining got rid of a VERY invasive and nasty protection scheme indeed. Publishers do listen to complaints and do respond to bad press - and we see that in the way that SecuROM is being shaped today into something somewhat less draconian. I fail to see that as a bad thing for you and I!

[kalniel]

kalniel, why are you so insistent on trying to changes peoples view of DRM?

What? Where have I ever started a discussion trying to change people's views? If someone else starts a discussion saying how rubbish they think something is aren't I entitled to put across a counter viewpoint, or in your world are you only allowed to post on a discussion forum if you're in completely agreement with the original poster?

A personal vested interest perhaps?

Absolutely - I'm a PC gamer and I believe piracy will lessen my personal enjoyment of PC games in the future.

If you want to skip a game because you don't like the DRM then that's cool with me. What I don't like are people who think that piracy has any kind of legitimacy (see above sentance) and those who have the facts wrong about DRM.

Many people HATE DRM, we hate the fact we can be in a situation where we cannot play the game we have purchased, we hate the fact it "calls home" and could have any number of potentially harmful payloads embedded within it.

And that's a fair viewpoint to have. But equally fair is for other people to point out that you have got exactly what you purchased *if* you are purchasing a license to use a game in a pre-agreed manner rather than all out rights to use how you wish, and to point out that it the calling home is no worse than other purchases which people have made without such a hoohah.

If you are happy to accept it, then do so. The rest of us will do you a favour and continue to boycott as many games as possible that contain the nuisance.

If you are happy to not play games that contain it, then do so. The rest of us will do you a favour and continue to buy as many good games as possible regardless of whether they have it or not.

Todays DRM isn't too bad but if everyone accepts it, tomorrows will be as invasive as possible.........

Then please don't play the game. But whatever you do, please don't pirate the game, because that *will* just bring harsher measures that are more likely to affect all of us.

As for a "right to protect your IP", as long as it does not effect the customer in any way at all, then fine. Unfortunately DRM can, and does, effect the customer.

As can ignoring piracy.

I don't really feel like arguing this point to death with you kalniel, I think Securom is bad for consumers and bad for PC gaming in general and you don't. I've made my arguments and you disagree. Leave it at that.

No problem. Oh hang on..

You're locked out of your game, and at the mercy of the monkeys at EA customer support. That is a small issue?

I thought you were leaving it at that? That didn't last long!

[Olmy]

I meant I didn't want to sit breaking down each others posts into small quotes and trying to destroy each other's argument using sophistry, its juvenile. Note how I said I didn't want to argue this to death with you.

[kalniel]

Well I'm sorry if I've offended you - breaking down posts to address points was just a way I could make sure my replies were clearly associated with the point I was addressing. Failure to do so can often cause confusion on a medium like internet forums.

However if you don't wish your points to be openly discussed by any individual who is part of a forum then I suggest you don't make them public.

[Nick]

Guys,

I think it's clear that we all have differing views on this and DRM in general.

Please don't sink into personal attacks or mud-slinging and force me to close what is pretty damn good discussion.

Cheers.

Nick

[Olmy]

I'm not offended, I'm simply saying that I disagree with you, and I don't feel like arguing those points further as its leading nowhere ie. agree to disagree. That doesn't mean I can't continue to contribute to the discussion with other posters.

Thanks Nick .

[j.o.s.h.1408]

Why would you run out of installs?

umm reformating, changing hardware components, potenial mess up on your pc resulting to a format, dead hard ware, etc etc.

Your a tech guy who messes around with pc's right? never had to do the above at least once this year?

kalniel i appreciate your views and opinions but the other guys are right to an extent that it sounds as if people who dont buy games because of DRM = people who is looking for an excuse to pirate.

come on kalniel im sure you dont mean that granted DRM works great for you but please respect peoples views that it doesnt for some people and dont say that they are over reacting when there not.

DRM is here to stay as u rightly said before but DRM doesnt make life any easier for a pc gamer and brings more pain to ""some" users and no pain for pirates who download the "none DRM" free version and play it with no headache whatsoever.

I personaly not too bothered with fc2 being a DRM game because that same game is on the consoles and so i have a alternative in getting it for that. a game like Sims 3 having that DRM problem will be a dilemma for me though as thats a pc only title And dont laugh, the sims is a great game! hehe

[kalniel]

umm reformating, changing hardware components, potenial mess up on your pc resulting to a format, dead hard ware, etc etc.

Your a tech guy who messes around with pc's right? never had to do the above at least once this year?

I've done planned re-formats and changed hardware, yes - non of which will touch your install limit. As for dead hardware - in most cases that still won't require using up an activation. There are cases where it can, such as hard drive failure, but as I said before, I've only ever had 2 drives fail, in 15 years of computing - that would still leave me with 3 further activations, which you could project mean the game had lasted me 37 years! If I'm still even wanting to play a game 37 years after it's come out I'd be more than happy to buy another copy of it.

kalniel i appreciate your views and opinions but the other guys are right to an extent that it sounds as if people who dont buy games because of DRM = people who is looking for an excuse to pirate.

Absolutely not. I don't know how to make it clearer, but I fully support people not playing a game at all because they don't agree with DRM - just as I support them for not using windows because they don't agree with DRM. My contempt (which I don't think I've really expressed because it's irrelevant to intelligent people) is solely for people who pirate games, whether they use DRM as an excuse or not (and out of everyone that pirates I think DRM avoidance is very much a lesser reason), but let me make it REALLY clear - I don't think anyone on hexus is that stupid.

come on kalniel im sure you dont mean that granted DRM works great for you but please respect peoples views that it doesnt for some people and dont say that they are over reacting when there not.

I don't think I've said anything of the sort - please also respect my viewpoint

[shaithis]

What? Where have I ever started a discussion trying to change people's views? If someone else starts a discussion saying how rubbish they think something is aren't I entitled to put across a counter viewpoint, or in your world are you only allowed to post on a discussion forum if you're in completely agreement with the original poster?

Constantly telling people who hate DRM that "DRM is fine your over-reacting" is basically trying to change their perception of DRM. What's especially funny is that you seem to completely disregard rootkits as an issue, when its completely within the realm of possibility that you already have 1 or more installed on your PC without your knowledge.

Absolutely - I'm a PC gamer and I believe piracy will lessen my personal enjoyment of PC games in the future.

Piracy is one thing, we are talking about DRM here..... I hope your not going to jump on the "all DRM haters are pirates" bandwagon?

If you want to skip a game because you don't like the DRM then that's cool with me. What I don't like are people who think that piracy has any kind of legitimacy (see above sentance) and those who have the facts wrong about DRM.

If you think pirates are here complaining about DRM, then you haven't thought the logic through. Any of us could go to a usenet or torrent site and download these games with the DRM removed. No messing, no fuss. Why the hell would we be here complaining about it?

The ONLY people who could possibly have an issue with DRM are legitimate (potential) purchasers.

And that's a fair viewpoint to have. But equally fair is for other people to point out that you have got exactly what you purchased *if* you are purchasing a license to use a game in a pre-agreed manner rather than all out rights to use how you wish, and to point out that it the calling home is no worse than other purchases which people have made without such a hoohah.

I guess you have never haggled in your life, nor told someone that you thought their terms were unfair? You just accept everything "as is"?

If you are happy to not play games that contain it, then do so. The rest of us will do you a favour and continue to buy as many good games as possible regardless of whether they have it or not.

Your doing me no favours. Just sending a message out that your willing to accept anything they throw at you in the name of "IP protection". I am sure everyone will be lining up to thank you the day rootkits come as standard....at least the legitimate purchasers will...by then a lot of people like myself may resort to piracy as that would be the only way to get the game without truly invasive software being loaded as part of the install.

But then, that wouldn't bother you would it? The rootkit is part and parcel of the licence, so I guess it would be fine with you?

Would you also be happy with a Darwinian state?

[Saracen]

......

And that's a fair viewpoint to have. But equally fair is for other people to point out that you have got exactly what you purchased *if* you are purchasing a license to use a game in a pre-agreed manner rather than all out rights to use how you wish, and to point out that it the calling home is no worse than other purchases which people have made without such a hoohah. .....

Agreed ..... providing it's clear in advance that DRM is indeed what you are getting, and what the implications of it are, in terms of install limits, activations, phoning home, etc. And by clear, I mean on the box, prominently, where I can see it at P.O.S.

DRM to me is not any form of justification for piracy .... or at least, other than it one very specific sense, which I'll come on to in a moment. But it is a justification for not buying a game if it contains a DRM that I find unacceptable. That implies I need to know, before buying, what DRM it has. Put a clear explanation on the box, and I don't mean in 1-point type, white on white, in Martian, and I'll buy or not buy accordingly. But personally, I won't buy if it involves requiring activation servers and install limits. I only want it on one machine, but I don't (and more relevantly, won't) muck about with calls to customer service getting an activation limit reset because I've rebuilt or replaced my machine too many times.

My problem is that it's getting to be a nightmare trying to work out which games have DRM, and where they do, what DRM and how onerous it is. To be honest, it's getting to be too much like hard work just trying to like track of who does what. I'm not a hardcore gamer, but when the inclination strikes me, I do want to be able to walk into a computer store, rummage about a bit, pick something I fancy and buy it without getting all sorts of DRM garbage installed in the process, and without having to spend ages researching the game to see what DRM it has.

So, for all practical intents and purposes, I've given up buying PC games. I've even bought a console, which I said I'd never do, simply because I can't be bothered with all the hassle.


I said there was one context in which DRM was a justification for piracy. That context is this. If I bought a game legitimately, and then found it was DRM'd to the hilt, I would, personally, see a moraljustification for getting a DRM-less pirate version. After all, I've got a paid-for boxed version of it, so where's the harm (other than the potential for nasties being installed along with the pirate version).

It would still be an illegal copy, of course, by I don't see it ever ending up with legal action providing I bought that legit copy. I still wouldn't do it, though, mainly because it's far too much hassle for a game and I couldn't be bothered,. But I can see the moral argument for that.

So, at least as far as I'm concerned, DRM has pretty much switched me off buying PC games, period. It isn;t that I won't buy any, but that I won't buy any with obnoxious (to me) DRM, and it's getting to be too much of a pain working out which have DRM and how it works. So if I come across something that both appeals to me and which I'm sure has no DRM of a sort I won't accept, then I'll buy it. But I'm not going to much effort to work out which games they might be.

As a result, at least in terms of getting their hands on my money, games DRM is just losing sales for those companies that use it, it's also costing those that don't use it sales, because I'm pretty much not buying anything right now. And I doubt if I'm alone in that. Minority probably, but not alone.

[kalniel]

Constantly telling people who hate DRM that "DRM is fine your over-reacting" is basically trying to change their perception of DRM. What's especially funny is that you seem to completely disregard rootkits as an issue, when its completely within the realm of possibility that you already have 1 or more installed on your PC without your knowledge.

Isn't it also possible I have none? That's what I don't get - this sort of paranoia that just because you can't see rootkits, any peice of software you don't like might be installing them. I agree it's better to be cautious with these things, but there's a point at which you would be frightened of installing anything you hadn't coded yourself.

Piracy is one thing, we are talking about DRM here..... I hope your not going to jump on the "all DRM haters are pirates" bandwagon?

Please read my previous posts.

If you think pirates are here complaining about DRM

Please read my previous posts.

I guess you have never haggled in your life, nor told someone that you thought their terms were unfair? You just accept everything "as is"?

Please read the post which you quoted and my previous posts. To repeat myself, I think it's fine to post displeasure at DRM, but you have to accept that it's also fair to allow someone to discuss that viewpoint.

I certainly don't accept everything as is and if a game isn't worth the money then I give the most effective message possible, which is not to play it.

But then, that wouldn't bother you would it? The rootkit is part and parcel of the licence, so I guess it would be fine with you?

If a rootkit were ever included as part of a license then I would read it, weigh up the pros and cons and decide whether the game was worth playing with the given license conditions. If it wasn't then I just wouldn't play it - it's hardly rocket science, nor is it going to change my life not to play a game.

Would you also be happy with a Darwinian state?

I'm not familar with the term, sorry - can you explain it?

[kalniel]

But personally, I won't buy if it involves requiring activation servers and install limits. I only want it on one machine, but I don't (and more relevantly, won't) muck about with calls to customer service getting an activation limit reset because I've rebuilt or replaced my machine too many times.

A viewpoint similar to my own - but I'm ok as long as there is a working revoke system that I think will be ok for my type of use. I'm not so fussed about the type of scheme, only what affect it has on me regarding number of installs and revoke mechanism etc.

I said there was one context in which DRM was a justification for piracy. That context is this. If I bought a game legitimately, and then found it was DRM'd to the hilt, I would, personally, see a moraljustification for getting a DRM-less pirate version. After all, I've got a paid-for boxed version of it, so where's the harm (other than the potential for nasties being installed along with the pirate version).

For me it would kind of depend on what you mean by DRM'd to the hilt. The actual DRM itself I wouldn't mind, but anything that would stop me from reasonably using the product in the way expressed to me in the license I would deem as breach of contract and take action - I don't think I'd take it into my own hands regarding piracy, but I would certainly be going to trading standards.

[Saracen]

....

I'm not familar with the term, sorry - can you explain it?

I would imagine he's referring to Darwinian "natural selection", of reinforcing successful traits through heredity.

But the implication of that is a rather cold-blooded "survival of the fittest", which is pretty much how nature does things by reinforcing and making more common those traits and abilities that work, regardless of whether they're ethically desirable or not, and eliminating others that might be desirable but ineffective.

Extend that to the state and you have a state with might is right, where there's no social responsibility, and where it's rather dog-eat-dog. The sick would be abandoned or killed, because they're contra-survival.

I guess the point was that if we all just put up with DRM we don't like, then we give companies no reason to reduce it, eliminate it or come up with a better way, for Darwinian reasons - it worked. If, on the other hand, nobody bought a game with obnoxious DRN, it'd pretty soon get dropped. The survival of DRM is, therefore, Darwinian - it depends on being successful, which it will be if those that don't like it don't react against it.