You must have skipped the EULA:Originally Posted by Kyorisu
So as you can see, it's the annoying, yet legal way; or the easy, yet illegal way! Hopefully you can see why this whole issue is an exercise in frustration. I obviously wish to support the developers, yet they persist in adding restrictions to my gaming that are aimed squarely at pirates!
Ewwwwwwwwwwwwww
Do you honestly think anyone here gives a damn what the EULA says? The odds of being called out on a violation are insanely low. I'm sure the following is true for many of us;
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/3784/exampleva5.jpg
well, i admit that i pirated a lot of games when i was a child. i pirated 99% of my commodore64 games. today i have more money and play far less games and, as i mentioned above, i want a (quite) clean system (which is why i don't want to get my software from emule&co...). so i really don't mind paying 40$ for a game every 3 months. i'm not going to piate bioshock, i will just boycott it.
(i will probably buy a gaming pc in a year or so. i will put it in my living room and only use it for gaming and internet surfing. on this pc most protection-software will be acceptable to me.)
*gg*Off topic: Only 500gb?
/waits for someone to point out the 500GB Porn drive.
So there is now a line between "respecting the EULA" and "respecting the developers"? Does this line depend on whether or not I will be caught? If that is the case, I may as well buy the game and crack it!
...And now we come full circle: if I am forced to break the EULA and use pirated tools to play this game with at least a modicum of practicality, what's the point in even buying the game? While supporting the developers is a highly agreeable reason, I can only think that I will just be supporting continuous development of DRM like what bioshock contains.
I'm not stopping you.
How where you forced? Did someone point a gun at your head? I think not. Anyway as legitimate customers I think it's fair we should have our say in what's right and what's not when dealing with copy protection. Frankly if it's needed they should just use Safedisc.
Wait what was I thinking Safedisc is worse off security wise but I'm sure those ☺☺☺☺☺ing about SecuROM have also encountered SafeDisc.
Wikiquote - don't bash me it's a quick and easy source.
SafeDisc installs its own Windows device driver to the user's computer, named secdrv.sys. In addition to enabling the copy protection, it grants ring 0 access to the running application. This is a potential security risk, since trojans and other malware could use the driver to obtain administrator access to the machine, even if the programs are running under a limited account.[citation needed]
Even worse is that (beside the default configuration on Windows XP), most installers don't set the security configuration appropriately, allowing every user to let the driver configuration point at an arbitrarily chosen executable which (at the next reboot) is started with administrator privileges.
A pithy response to hyperbole, I guess we just need to agree to disagree here. :)I'm not stopping you.
As stated in the rest of that sentence, in order to be able to play without significant disruptions to my other activities, I would need to crack the game.
I highly agree. The release of the earlier RPG 'Oblivion' is a good example of how to release a single player game well. There was no requirement beyond needing the CD in the tray, a liveable cost compared to the systems in place in other games.Anyway as legitimate customers I think it's fair we should have our say in what's right and what's not when dealing with copy protection. Frankly if it's needed they should just use Safedisc.
To summarise before I leave for family related matters.
Activation = bad.
Consumer choice = good.
Simple and transparent copy protection = good.
I won't argue here because I've got the Steam version and it just sort of works without hassle.
Is 2k team also providing moving service if we purchase the game?
safedisc, as far as i know, has a blacklist of software that is not allowed to be installed on your pc. again, i think that's not acceptable for all people.
i don't think that there is a protection system that is on the one side safe enough and on the other side perfect for all gamers.
Well the box does say the game requires an internet connection, so you can only blame yourself. (or so I'm told).Is 2k team also providing moving service if we purchase the game?
Blacklisting is easily avoided but I see your point. Simply disc check = win. Now I'm off to get loaded.
World Changed. Now spending dough to get tortured is the trend, that's it!
well, i don't like disc checks because if i can't make a backup copy of my game, i prefer to leave the gamedisc in its case. and a disc check most of the time only makes sense if you have software running in the background that searches for other software that might emulate the copy protection of the disc.
anyway: if it was just a simple disc check, it would be okay to me. (wouldn't like it but of course that's nothing that would keep me from buying the game)
Ok, I admit that I didn't see that line. But most of the game are so user friendly. I just want the game and I do not want to involve with the piracy war. If I remember correctly, the font is just normal (not highlighted, bold, underline, whatsoever) and so small. I bet many will notice it. Furthermore, it printed "note" on the case and "important note" on the manual (that is after you have purchased the DVD and opened up the case).
And now we learn that some Sony Rootkits do more than just DRM duty. They contact sony with information about the user. Completely Undisclosed.
So perhaps 2kgames could explain exactly what the SecureRom does and if it also contacts Sony with user information?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/02/ma...ne&oref=slogin
I’m starting to think that a revoke tool won’t ever be provided, for the reason I detail in my thread Do 2K Games think we’re fools? (Return of activation credit). As a revocation tool only weakens the protection, it seems more likely that 2K would wait until they feel online activation is unnecessary, then completely remove it.
Also, Sony seem to keep having problems with things they hide on people’s computers. Sony confirms security problem covers Sony’s admission of a flaw in their MicroVault USB sticks with fingerprint readers.
But hey in the memory stick case they wanted to protect users data rather than their own ip. At least they admit to fault, discontinued the product and will have a patch out mid September.
If 2k came out and said "we'll remove the protection come x of y" I'd be happy. Doesn't seem too likely though.
Think what would make me happy (relative to Bioshock anyway) would be 2K admitting that the underhand way they introduced limited activations of the product was wrong for a start, and wouldn't be repeated. But I would definitely like to see limited activations removed altogether. It's particularly inappropriate for games given that games are usually the first thing you remove to save HDD space (due to their large size) and secondly gamers are the most likely to regularly change PC components.
Secondly, in regard to Securom, my main issue with it is the insidious way it attempts to prevent itself being removed. I mentioned Dark Messiah some pages back - on the box it contains the message:
"NOTICE: This game contains technology intended to prevent copying that may conflict with some disc and virtual drives".
Okay, had Bioshock done that, it would at least meant we knew the protection may be intrusive and we could have gone and checked before purchasing. Then, once we un-install Bioshock, we need the option to completely remove Securom ie all the relevant reg entries, the hidden files including those deliberately mal-formed named ones ...
So pop up a message when the body of Bioshock itself has un-installed: "The installation of Bioshock included 'copy protection' software, removing this may cause other entertainment software using the same protection solution to cease to function - do you wish to un-install the software?" And default it to "No".
Or some such, that's a quick draft - it needs more thought to ensure it's thorough and not ambiguous. Anyhow, with those measures in place I would be back in control of the situation - I'd know what I was doing and I could make informed decisions.
I really don't think it's a big ask to be granted that, in fact I think it's just courtesy really.
this would only worsen the situation for loyal fans who want a game on day 1. why reward the guys who get the game as a budget title some months later?
--> copy protection makes sense and i think publishers shouldn't remove it. but with internet-flatrates available to a majority of the gamers out there there has to be way to create a protection-system that's safe but doesn't rely on additonal software, rootkits and that stuff.
can someone explain to me why a simple unique code that has to be sent to a server is not enough?
Past initially pissing off the pirates i.e. NOW.
Piss easy. The real question is how to make a DRM solution that is transparent, doesn't compromise security, doesn't conflict with the computers normal operation and is easily installed/removed/updated. Otherwise you must rely on a companies goodwill to simply forgot about DRM solutions.
Or go with digital distribution and use the systems inbuilt limitations i.e. Steam.
Galciv2 made a good example
Galactic Civilizations II, Copy Protection, and Piracy
Setting the record straight
By Frogboy
Posted March 11, 2006 14:49:34
Digg is reporting that a website is implying that we want Galactic Civilizations II to be pirated. Absolutely not! Of course we DO NOT want our game to be pirated. We're a small company, every lost sale hurts us.
This got started because sales reports on Galactic Civilizations II have been much higher than anticipated. We've now outsold the first Galactic Civilizations in North America in the first 10 days. Last week we were apparently the #1 PC game at Walmart.
Naturally, some peple have taken the conclusion that because we don't have copy protection on our game, that we invite piracy. That is not the case, we simply think there are other ways to stop piracy than CD checks, strict DRM, etc.
What we do is provide a serial # that users can choose to enter when they install and use that unique serial # to download free and frequent updates.
Our license allows you to install the game onto as many machines that you own that you want as long as only one copy is being used at once.
How many sales are lost because people want to have a game on their laptop and desktop and don't want to drag CDs around so choose not to buy the game?
Our company also makes utility software. We've been around a long time -- 14 years now. Our software gets pirated. We don't like it but piracy is a fact of life. And not every pirated copy means a lost sale.
The question isn't about eliminating piracy, it's about increasing sales. It's about trying to make sure that people who would buy your product buy it instead of steal it.
Our primary weapon to fight piracy is through rewarding customers through convenient, frequent, free updates.
If you make it easy for users to buy and make full use of your product or service legitimately then we believe that you'll gain more users from that convenience than you'll lose from piracy.
We realize that some people or companies might feel threatened at any evidence that implies that draconian DRM schemes or CD copy protection may not make that big of a difference in sales.
For example, we were quite disturbed to discover that the company that makes Starforce provided a working URL to a list of pirated GalCiv II torrents. I'm not sure whether what they did was illegal or not, but it's troubling nevertheless and was totally unnecessary.
All software is pirated, there's no way around it. We've been making software for over 10 years. We don't like our software being pirated. Like I said, every lost sales has an impact on us. But there are other ways to reduce it than through draconian copy protection systems.
Incidentally, the site that Starforce's forum admin linked to "prove" how much our software was being pirated we visited, followed the instructions on the site to get our game removed and the links were removed within a couple of hours. We'll continue to follow-up with them.
Update: Starforce has removed the URL to the illegal files.
Follow up here: http://forums.galciv2.com/?ForumID=161&AID=107193
Personally I think no DRM is the best solution. Do what the GalCiv guys did and offer automatic updates which require an account (think steam all your purchases are linked to your account. However, unlike steam you should be given the option to unlink a key from your account, this would need email confirmation and possibly a time delay for security reasons). The patching would be on the fly rather than downloading one big file and running it. Hence pirates would have to work out what was updated so they could save on bandwidth and waste some of their time. Just the same the initial pirating groups would have had to pay for the game.
Those forum links again for the hell of it.
http://forums.galciv2.com/index.aspx...aid=106741&c=1
http://forums.galciv2.com/?ForumID=161&AID=107193
yep: it should be a pain to only have the pirated version of a game and it should be rewarding to have the original. for bioshock it seems to be the other way around.
I don't own GalCiv2 but reading stuff like that makes me interested and makes me want to support a company willing to reward customer loyalty rather than immediately penalise it as could be said about Bioshock's methods.
Knowing I can get the game, have it on both PC and Laptop, not worry about where the CD/DVD is in relation to either at all times, is really enough in itself to make me register the game and stay loyal, though obviously getting rewarded for that registration is a boon.
Now there is a sensible approach. (I may just go out and buy their game based on that quote alone) Other companies seem to manage without sneaking DRM rubbish into their games, Epic and Id for example seem to be doing okay for themselves without resorting to this crap. Personally I have no problems with a disk check protection mechanism or for that matter any protection that does not pull stunts like Securom, Starforce and their ilk.Galactic Civilizations II, Copy Protection, and Piracy
Setting the record straight
By Frogboy
Posted March 11, 2006 14:49:34
...
snip
Keep checking up here for the latest SecuROM removal tools. There is already a previous tool that is known to work without disrupting the game itself.
I, at least, have found a way to track any changes to my system, hidden or not, via checking the install date and time. But that's a special program which very few people are privy to. Though I may decide to let it go public if SecuROM and/or 2k do not provide a complete removal tool... fairly soon.
Or remove it manually? It's not that hard to find the required apps to do so.
I must have missed when you said that earlier. Now that you mention it, I seem to remember seeing that printed on a number of game cases lately. That kind of ticks me off that 2K didn't include it. I guess they though printing "Requires internet connection for activation" twice on the box (it really is, don't ask me why) would be sufficient for that? o_O
I think this would be great even though other games don't do it. I know why they don't do it, but it's a stupid reason, really.Okay, had Bioshock done that, it would at least meant we knew the protection may be intrusive and we could have gone and checked before purchasing. Then, once we un-install Bioshock, we need the option to completely remove Securom ie all the relevant reg entries, the hidden files including those deliberately mal-formed named ones ...
So pop up a message when the body of Bioshock itself has un-installed: "The installation of Bioshock included 'copy protection' software, removing this may cause other entertainment software using the same protection solution to cease to function - do you wish to un-install the software?" And default it to "No".
The principle theory when trying to combat piracy should be to make a legitimate version more appealing. Sadly this isn't so with Bioshock and many other games.
No DRM from the customer's and companies' POV.
Customer: No install limits, no extra software installed and no disc required. Most importantly freedom in how you use the product.
Company: DRM free products can entice those who are sitting on the fence regarding a decision to buy. No DRM means you theres no DRM which needs to be supported by official or third party means. Choosing not to use DRM means you save money paying for license fees to use said DRM. Piracy may occur quicker and in larger numbers (due to less tinkering required by people that simply don't have a clue how to replace an .exe) but those people are typically not going to buy the game. However, some pirates may go out of their way and buy the product having enjoyed it and knowing the retail version will be just as easy to use.
** MESSAGE FROM 2K ELIZABETH:
The forum moderator quoted below is not a 2K employee and does not represent the views and opinions of 2K. The individual, "JT Tech 2K," works for an outside tech support group and is not an employee of 2K Games. The technician who posted this has been suspended while we conduct our investigation.
***
So...here are a few posts from a thread that was deleted in the tech support forum. I find it a bit telling:
Now, I agree that the poster was being a bit of a tool, but it's a good question.Nemesisdesignz wrote:
I installed Bioshock on my laptop under one admin user, Everything works fine, but I then tried to switch users on my computer and whenever I launch Bioshock it is asking me to enter my serial again for the game.... IS THIS GONNA CHARGE ME TWO OF MY 5 Activations???? IF SO THAT IS GAY.... I need to know this ASAP before I attempt to play this on my pc under the other user... THis is a bug if the case be....so get yo stuff fixed!
Here's the response from moderator 2k Tech JT:
My response:2k Tech JT writes:
The other way to view this, is one USER has purchased the game. Not the whole family. So why should your brother play for free?
Jakester writes:
If your spouse buys a book, do you go out and buy another copy if you want to read it, or do you read it when she's not or when she's done?
If you purchase a DVD, do you buy one copy for each of your friends and family who are going to watch the movie with you? Do you ever lend or borrow movies?
Why should my brother play for free? Because it's FAIR USE of a product I have purchased.
I have been holding off on purchasing BioShock because of the DRM (and if you think it's necessary, check out this GalCiv2 thread). However, this mentality of blatant disrespect of people who purchased your game, and the no-longer-veiled attempts to deny basic fair use rights of legitimate purchasers is reprehensible.
I'm sorry, Ken Levine -- based on the demo, you made a kick-ass game, but it's one I wont' be buying (nor will it be one I'm playing). Further, I'll not be buying any 2k/Take-two games on any platform. IF it means no GTA, so be it. If it means no Manhunt 2 (I was going to support them because I don't appreciate censorship, either, even though I only marginally enjoyed the first game), then so be it.
We can talk on these forums until our fingers bleed, but what will make a difference is when we speak with our purchasing dollars and do not support a company that "permits" its customers to use their software at the publisher's whim. Now, I know 2k publishes good and popular games, but, really, if you don't like the taste of crap, stop eating filet mignon wrapped in crap!
Last edited by 2K Elizabeth; 09-06-2007 at 12:40 PM.
It no doubt reveals the stance of 2K, on these issues. I find it disturbing, that such a lack of respect for paying customers, exists. Let me re-prahse that, lack of respect for PC paying customers. It's actually frustrating to not be able to do more than NOT buy the game. 2K should really pay for all this mess and I hope that people were fortunate enough to learn about this mess, before buying the game, since 2K is obviously banking on the fact, that people were unaware of all this, to profit.
That's really unbelievable...
Even Microsoft isn't that underhanded, multiple people can use Windows on the same machine
By the way. Why was it deleted exactly ?
I mean that 2K answer was already ridiculous enough to make people furious...
That is utterly ridiculous. I stop by the forums every few days to see if 2k Games has given me a reason to purchase their game but everytime I come here I find more ☺☺☺☺ that turns me off from this company.
regarding "fair use": i'd guess publishers (also of movies, books, music, etc) never wanted fair use. but they just couldn't prevent people from sharing their DVDs, CDs, etc. Then with mp3, decent video codecs, high-bandwidth flatrates, etc. many people switched from fair use to "unfair use". it's comprehensible that the publishers want to prevent people from doing that because it's a big difference if i lend a game to a friend or if i share it on the net. well, that way they legitimate the use of DRM (and i think it's okay). the problem for us is that in DRM they see a chance to even prevent us from "fair use"...
Not a clue....
Here's the thread in reverse order. In retrospect, Richard appears to be a voice of reason and indicates that you can actually get more than 5 activations. I haven't seen that anywhere before, though. Apologies for the formatting. I'm too lazy to re-do it.
reholli I have to comment a little more about this.
Some of the moderators and regular supporters of 2K in this forum express such rabid, extreme points of view in their attempts to remain loyal to 2K that they abandon any attempt to apply reason and logic to the discussions.
Even when legitimate issues are raised, the attempt is always made to defend an untenable position and divert the point being made away from the actual issue to something different.
Only the official spokespeople from 2K seem at times to be able to reply reasonably on the issues, e.g. 2K Elizabeth's following statement:
Link: http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/sho...&postcount=120
Check the reference to being able to install and play simultaneously on 2 different systems.
I like this game, have nothing against 2K, have only minor issues in the overall scheme of things with respect to the game's activation and installation issues, but I'm rapidly becoming fed-up with the knee-jerk responses of so many.
You must all be proud of the lost ability to use your minds....
Today 01:26 PM
reholli
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2K Tech JT View Post
The other way to view this, is one USER has purchased the game. Not the whole family. So why should your brother play for free?
Because in the home computing environment especially, software is usually oriented towards a family using a single machine. Even if you think about most productivity application software packages, multiple users don't need multiple licenses. My wife and son don't need a seperate license to run Microsoft Word under their logins on my computer, or a seperated license for Windows XP, and that's as it should be.
If your brother still lives at home, a part of the immediate family, the current model usually allows him to play for free. The gaming world appears to be becoming more restrictive, however.
Continue voicing opinions like yours, and it will become even more so...
Today 01:16 PM
sendittome
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2K Tech JT View Post
The other way to view this, is one USER has purchased the game. Not the whole family. So why should your brother play for free?
Did not think to happen so fast, but your statement is even more ridicilous.
So you also have to buy 2 ore more licences of Windows, ...the same weird logic.
Not bought for one machine but one user.
So in case your brother wants to use your computer with his profile--> buy 2nd licence.
Come on....
When does it stop?
You don`t want to be taken serious with statements like this, do you?
Today 12:59 PM
Nemos
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2K Tech JT View Post
The other way to view this, is one USER has purchased the game. Not the whole family. So why should your brother play for free?
Coming soon: Splitscreen games that ask for Player 2's serial key!
Today 12:49 PM
2K Tech JT The other way to view this, is one USER has purchased the game. Not the whole family. So why should your brother play for free?
Today 12:26 PM
reholli Seperate activations for different users on the same system is definitely frustrating. However, if they were enforcing the EULA to the letter, only a single user on one machine could use the game.
Be happy!
Today 11:52 AM
sendittome Different user on same machine needing activation,.. what more ridicilous things does this avtivation crap hide? - More to come?
Guys, this goes far beyond any meaningful copyprotection.
Today 10:16 AM
2K Tech Richard Yes, activations are done per user on a machine.
However you do have a full 5 activations and can request more if you need to at any time.
Yesterday 10:00 PM
NemesisDesignz I installed Bioshock on my laptop under one admin user, Everything works fine, but I then tried to switch users on my computer and whenever I launch Bioshock it is asking me to enter my serial again for the game.... IS THIS GONNA CHARGE ME TWO OF MY 5 Activations???? IF SO THAT IS GAY.... I need to know this ASAP before I attempt to play this on my pc under the other user... THis is a bug if the case be....so get yo stuff fixed!
I'm speechless...I never saw something like this. It's clearly either 2K's way or the highway (after they took your money of course).
That's it for me. I really wanted to buy this game AFTER the install limits BS was removed. But I was starting to get the impression, that that would not happen. And with answers like these, it's almost 100% certain, that nothing will be done to address this issue. Congrast 2K! $50 may not be much in your "grand scheme" of things, but you won't get mine anyway.
They won't get my money either. 2k Tech JT can go ☺☺☺☺ himself.
Posting Permissions
