Ermm..Staforce DESTROYED my PC when trying to install X3 as it did to a LOT of people hence the uproar on the X3 forum, no I'm not a freetard or a pirate whining because of lack of cracks etc.SullyE said:It's been given a bad name by pirates, though, and that bad name's spread to legitimate users. It's often not as bad as it seems.
Look, Securom? Works fine for most people,
think it was Starforce? Turns out it actually does none of those things and is fairly benign. It also went uncracked for ages..
Asscreed 2 works whenever the ubi servers are down. Which is quite often. You just checked at a bad moment or something.dochmbi said:Great, only problem: C&C 4: Cracked and fully playable.
Assassins Creed 2: Not cracked and missions aren't playable.
So the dead DVD drive on my shelf is a coincidence then? Until now I'd though X3's Starforce was what killed it, and unless you can offer an acceptable alternative explanation for a perfectly good drive to die after playing a specific game, that's the what I'll continue to believe.SullyE said:Starforce? Turns out it actually does none of those things and is fairly benign. It also went uncracked for ages.
It's not really about DRM, it's about an internet requirement while playing. Even steam has an offline mode. Sure, the other methods can be irritating, but this is sort of the breaking point for me. So no, the others should not be on that list, because for all their intrusive DRM crap, they let me play my game whether my internet is working tonight or not.Eclectic Dreck said:You are aware that most major publishers deal in DRM right? This would include Valve (Steam IS DRM along with being a handy retail channel, and many games distributed on that system have additional measures added.) Activision ought to be on that list too, as should Sony, Microsoft and any other multibillion dollar sofware company really. To be fair, I'm only aware of one company that NEVER used DRM and that's Stardock. Also, Stardock makes awesome games.TheMadTypist said:Great, another company to add to the "Do Not Buy" list. Well, it's EA, so no big loss in quality. Speaking in terms of quantity, however, it is a blow.
So, developers, if you want my money, do not publish with:
Ubisoft
EA
This was pretty much my first thought. I'm more impressed that EA tried to spin it. not as much as I would have been if they'd said something like "yeah, we fucked up. We thought it was a good idea but Ubisoft showed us the light" or something, but this does sound like something they put in ages ago and then saw how badly it went for Assassin's Creed 2.Keslen said:Putting aside all the obvious crap related to this topic, much of which has been touched upon ad nauseam in previous posts, there's a really interesting idea at the core of this that says volumes about society as a whole.
In a nutshell, had it not been for Ubisoft's debacle, EA would have probably gotten away with this.
That's right, if Ubisoft had not recently shipped popular games with an always-connected-to-the-inernet requirement labeled as DRM, this exact same announcement from EA would have likely been welcomed with open arms by the vast majority of the population, even those in "a position to know" and definitely myself. The recent coupling of that feature with that label is the only thing that brought the footnote of the internet connection in that announcement to the forefront of anyone's attention, except possibly those who didn't have a near constant internet feed active and (no offense intended to anyone here) wouldn't have been willing or able to make enough noise to sway the general population.
Don't get me wrong here, I recognize this for what it is - a thinly veiled DRM that will give pirates more benefits (jubilation at cracking the tougher system) than detriments (hours, maybe days, extra time for fully functional cracked versions are readily available to the public) and cause the actual paying customer with nothing but inconvenience as thanks for actually shelling out their cash. But that recognition is only because of the education that Ubisoft afforded me when they helpfully labeled the feature for what it is. I'd have missed it otherwise.
I'd have been impressed if they'd tried the jedi mind trick.Chipperz said:I'm more impressed that EA tried to spin it. not as much as I would have been if they'd said something like "yeah, we fucked up.
Invasive, inconvenient DRM will eventually end up on consoles. All the bad parts of PC gaming end up on consoles as well, except the upgrade cycle (can't really see console manufacturers openning that up).I'm really beginning to feel sorry for PC gamers. Constantly screaming "BOYCOTT!" at everything has got to be making them hoarse right now...
Sure there is. You can only play it on a proprietary, closed system. You need the game's physical media there to play it. These are forms of digital rights management.theultimateend said:Well the good news is there is absolutely no DRM on Pokemon.
#1 - Yes, they will have nasty DRM. See any Bioware game on console in the past 12 months. Hell, even Mirror's Edge needed you to use their proprietary, external account system to play. It's fucking ridiculous.RhomCo said:Invasive, inconvenient DRM will eventually end up on consoles. All the bad parts of PC gaming end up on consoles as well, except the upgrade cycle (can't really see console manufacturers openning that up).