Ubisoft fails. AC2 already leaked and cracked.

whats drm?

i won a legit copy of the game what do you mean it punished people who bought it?

whats drm?

i won a legit copy of the game what do you mean it punished people who bought it?

mirriorman

[QUOTE="mirriorman"]

whats drm?

i won a legit copy of the game what do you mean it punished people who bought it?

Hahadouken

[QUOTE="Chofee"]

So much discussion on the topic and no one seems to realise the most basic thing about piracy.. Only people who don't want to buy the game are pirating it.. When developers finally figure that out, their stance on intrusive drm protections will change.. Person who pirates the game only does it because he doesn't want to buy it AND the game is accessible through torrents and whatnot.. If you take out one of the conditions ie. remove the accessibility of the game through uncrackable drm, the other condition still applies, he doesn't want to buy the game. That person will just shift his interest to some other game that is accessible. Simple as that. DRM doesn't have magical effect of making you suddenly want to buy the game, but it does have a tangible effect on regular buyers who actually buy the game to instanly become aware that they also got a decent chunk of iritation boxed with their new game.

ShadowriverUB

It's not work like that way, people are not good like that ,it's people mentality.

My country was infested with piracy in 16-bit nad 8-bit era on Commodore and Atari devices (only gameing machines we had), since it was grey zone market (no law restricting that) in and short after fall of communism. Now after that people still have mentality "why to buy if you can get for free" and download games insted of buying it, piracy is still high here, specially on PC. I had situations when i buy a game and my freind donload it and he laugh at me becouse of that.

DRM is needed what ever you like or not, since other way it will turn one outlaw. Removing DRM won't magicly make people buy a game either and make situation even worse, how do you will feel wasteing money if around you people just download it for free?

CD-Key are revolutionery, since this made people buy game to play MP, i seen that effect in my country. It's most effective DRM method, still single player games can't protect like that. Digital distribution might safe the day here.

I don't think you understand what i'm saying and i'm not sure i understand you either :D

But let's take that friend of your as an example.. He was laughing at you because you bought the game while he, on the other hand, just downloaded it. Now imagine this. He cracks it, and plays it without any problems, and you, the person who bought the game, have problem installing it, or have problems with authentication, or anything else related to DRM protection on that game. How will that make you feel? Kinda silly, won't it.. That friend of yours will be laughing at you even harder now. And the thing is, you say "why to buy if you can get for free" and that's my point exactly. That friend of yours will not buy a game because it has insane uncrackable DRM protection and there is no running pirate version of it anywhere to be found.. He will just find some other game, that is cracked, and download that instead because "why buy when you can get it for free". Do you now understand what im saying?

People pirating software never had the intention of buying it in the first place. Using intrusive and complicated DRM only affects people actually buying the game. Do you think you need an entire army guarding McDonalds against vegetarians? It's kinda unnecessary because McDonalds has inherent protection against them, they are selling something vegans don't want. But with an army and 5 different methods of authentication to get into a McDonalds restaurant only puts a chubby kid wanting a burger at inconvenience. You know, the same kid that keeps your business running..

I don't think you understand what i'm saying and i'm not sure i understand you either :D

But let's take that friend of your as an example.. He was laughing at you because you bought the game while he, on the other hand, just downloaded it. Now imagine this. He cracks it, and plays it without any problems, and you, the person who bought the game, have problem installing it, or have problems with authentication, or anything else related to DRM protection on that game. How will that make you feel? Kinda silly, won't it.. That friend of yours will be laughing at you even harder now. And the thing is, you say "why to buy if you can get for free" and that's my point exactly. That friend of yours will not buy a game because it has insane uncrackable DRM protection and there is no running pirate version of it anywhere to be found.. He will just find some other game, that is cracked, and download that instead because "why buy when you can get it for free". Do you now understand what im saying?

People pirating software never had the intention of buying it in the first place. Using intrusive and complicated DRM only affects people actually buying the game. Do you think you need an entire army guarding McDonalds against vegetarians? It's kinda unnecessary because McDonalds has inherent protection against them, they are selling something vegans don't want. But with an army and 5 different methods of authentication to get into a McDonalds restaurant only puts a chubby kid wanting a burger at inconvenience. You know, the same kid that keeps your business running..

Chofee

People pirating the software never had the intention of buying it in the first place? This is a straw man arguement. First of all, you have no way to actually PROVE that because they ARE pirating it and people are DEFENDING the pirates. Also, of course in your scenario the person was never going to buy it because pirating is so easy and available and widely defended.

Like you said, why would a pirate buy a game when they can pirate it? But to then say "he never had any intention of buying it in the first place" is disingenuous. The reason he had no intention of buying it is because piracy is already so rampant to begin with.

[QUOTE="Chofee"]

I don't think you understand what i'm saying and i'm not sure i understand you either :D

But let's take that friend of your as an example.. He was laughing at you because you bought the game while he, on the other hand, just downloaded it. Now imagine this. He cracks it, and plays it without any problems, and you, the person who bought the game, have problem installing it, or have problems with authentication, or anything else related to DRM protection on that game. How will that make you feel? Kinda silly, won't it.. That friend of yours will be laughing at you even harder now. And the thing is, you say "why to buy if you can get for free" and that's my point exactly. That friend of yours will not buy a game because it has insane uncrackable DRM protection and there is no running pirate version of it anywhere to be found.. He will just find some other game, that is cracked, and download that instead because "why buy when you can get it for free". Do you now understand what im saying?

People pirating software never had the intention of buying it in the first place. Using intrusive and complicated DRM only affects people actually buying the game. Do you think you need an entire army guarding McDonalds against vegetarians? It's kinda unnecessary because McDonalds has inherent protection against them, they are selling something vegans don't want. But with an army and 5 different methods of authentication to get into a McDonalds restaurant only puts a chubby kid wanting a burger at inconvenience. You know, the same kid that keeps your business running..

ZIMdoom

People pirating the software never had the intention of buying it in the first place? This is a straw man arguement. First of all, you have no way to actually PROVE that because they ARE pirating it and people are DEFENDING the pirates. Also, of course in your scenario the person was never going to buy it because pirating is so easy and available and widely defended.

Like you said, why would a pirate buy a game when they can pirate it? But to then say "he never had any intention of buying it in the first place" is disingenuous. The reason he had no intention of buying it is because piracy is already so rampant to begin with.

I'll vouch for Chofee here as well. in the majority of cases i've found on campus, those who pirate, never buy the game, or intended to. and yeah i kid you not, i've been joked at for the being the 'dumb ass' who bought the game. soon enough for PC at least, we'll have something where the user doesn't get to even own or look at the code of the game, and will only be allowed to stream it. I mean c'mon.... people here cheering on the pirates for the intrusive DRM.... it's a snake that eats it's own tale. Pirate makes copy, millions play and a fraction of them might buy it (and that isn't even a valid excuse, for freaking sake there are game reviews and user reviews if you wanna know a game is good or not). Company loses millions of dollars, makes DRM, affects the customor who buys it, retaliation via more piracy. eventually three things might happen.... 1. Company abandons platform - looks to PC and PSP platforms.... 2. Company goes bankrupt 3. DRM is replaced with streaming-only. No DRM is all fine and good, and yes i'd prefer that. but if your working and someone else is distributing and stealing your stuff. your gonna be out of business very fast if you don't do SOMETHING. and in the video-gaming medium, it won't be just about making a better product, it'll be effecting the way the buyer and owner knows you own the game. SaudiFury

You are missing the point. Of course they have no intention of buying the game...they live in a world where it is quick and easy to steal it, without worry of any consquences, and why would they buy in when they can just steal it in the first place? It's like saying, why buy food when you can just steal it...and then turning around and defending that stealing by saying "Oh, I never had any intention of eating if I had to buy food".

The fact that they WANT they game is proven. They are talking about it, they CARE about who else has it, and they are taking the time to download it and play it. That is PROOF that they WANT the game. So to say they wouldn't buy it is completely illogical. They clearly WANT it, and if piracy wasn't an option then they WOULD most likely buy it. Not everyone, of course, but many WOULD.

But to act like all people who steal games don't actually want the game and would never buy it is total and complete BS. That is fact. And someone making fun of YOU for buying the game when they are stealing it is immature, grade school excuses. You should be a man and tell them that stealing a game is nothing to brag about.

I will agree with most of the rest of your post. But the point is this, if people hate DRM so much, and hate any other method companies use to try and crack down on pirates...then you should be taking it out on the pirates. Like those "friends" you claim are so proud of their stealing. Maybe if more PC users took a stand against people stealing games, then developers would

Because it IS a snake eating its own tale...but that snake isnt' developers.It is the PC community who has already decided that they would rather just steal something than pay for it. So don't blame developers who try to protect themselves.

[QUOTE="Chofee"]

I don't think you understand what i'm saying and i'm not sure i understand you either :D

But let's take that friend of your as an example.. He was laughing at you because you bought the game while he, on the other hand, just downloaded it. Now imagine this. He cracks it, and plays it without any problems, and you, the person who bought the game, have problem installing it, or have problems with authentication, or anything else related to DRM protection on that game. How will that make you feel? Kinda silly, won't it.. That friend of yours will be laughing at you even harder now. And the thing is, you say "why to buy if you can get for free" and that's my point exactly. That friend of yours will not buy a game because it has insane uncrackable DRM protection and there is no running pirate version of it anywhere to be found.. He will just find some other game, that is cracked, and download that instead because "why buy when you can get it for free". Do you now understand what im saying?

People pirating software never had the intention of buying it in the first place. Using intrusive and complicated DRM only affects people actually buying the game. Do you think you need an entire army guarding McDonalds against vegetarians? It's kinda unnecessary because McDonalds has inherent protection against them, they are selling something vegans don't want. But with an army and 5 different methods of authentication to get into a McDonalds restaurant only puts a chubby kid wanting a burger at inconvenience. You know, the same kid that keeps your business running..

ZIMdoom

People pirating the software never had the intention of buying it in the first place? This is a straw man arguement. First of all, you have no way to actually PROVE that because they ARE pirating it and people are DEFENDING the pirates. Also, of course in your scenario the person was never going to buy it because pirating is so easy and available and widely defended.

Like you said, why would a pirate buy a game when they can pirate it? But to then say "he never had any intention of buying it in the first place" is disingenuous. The reason he had no intention of buying it is because piracy is already so rampant to begin with.

not really...majority gamers (both pc and consoles) are kids or poor college students. lol i doubt they even have a credit card to purchase games online. Otherwise, why would Sony and MS sell points card in retail? cuz kids dont have credit card!

check mw2, lol even though it's rated for M, but I can always hear kids yelling on it.

not really...majority gamers (both pc and consoles) are kids or poor college students. lol i doubt they even have a credit card to purchase games online. Otherwise, why would Sony and MS sell points card in retail? cuz kids dont have credit card!

check mw2, lol even though it's rated for M, but I can always hear kids yelling on it.

oajlu

So now the arguement is that pirates don't have the money to buy the games so they HAVE to pirate them? Sorry, but this is just more excuses. I honestly don't care about pirating. I just don't like all the whining and excuses I constantly hear to justify the pirating. The fact is it is easy to steal on PC and there is practicaly ZERO chance of getting caught or facing any consequences. That is the SOLE reason people do it. Anything else is just making excuses.

[QUOTE="oajlu"]

not really...majority gamers (both pc and consoles) are kids or poor college students. lol i doubt they even have a credit card to purchase games online. Otherwise, why would Sony and MS sell points card in retail? cuz kids dont have credit card!

check mw2, lol even though it's rated for M, but I can always hear kids yelling on it.

ZIMdoom

So now the arguement is that pirates don't have the money to buy the games so they HAVE to pirate them? Sorry, but this is just more excuses. I honestly don't care about pirating. I just don't like all the whining and excuses I constantly hear to justify the pirating. The fact is it is easy to steal on PC and there is practicaly ZERO chance of getting caught or facing any consequences. That is the SOLE reason people do it. Anything else is just making excuses.

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

[QUOTE="oajlu"]

not really...majority gamers (both pc and consoles) are kids or poor college students. lol i doubt they even have a credit card to purchase games online. Otherwise, why would Sony and MS sell points card in retail? cuz kids dont have credit card!

check mw2, lol even though it's rated for M, but I can always hear kids yelling on it.

surrealnumber5

So now the arguement is that pirates don't have the money to buy the games so they HAVE to pirate them? Sorry, but this is just more excuses. I honestly don't care about pirating. I just don't like all the whining and excuses I constantly hear to justify the pirating. The fact is it is easy to steal on PC and there is practicaly ZERO chance of getting caught or facing any consequences. That is the SOLE reason people do it. Anything else is just making excuses.

Then you should take it out on the people you know who have pirated the game. Developers have every right to protect their product. YOU do NOT have some unspoken right to play games. NOBODY has ANY right to steal games for any reason.

Therefore, what you like or don't like is irrelevant.

[QUOTE="oajlu"]

not really...majority gamers (both pc and consoles) are kids or poor college students. lol i doubt they even have a credit card to purchase games online. Otherwise, why would Sony and MS sell points card in retail? cuz kids dont have credit card!

check mw2, lol even though it's rated for M, but I can always hear kids yelling on it.

ZIMdoom

So now the arguement is that pirates don't have the money to buy the games so they HAVE to pirate them? Sorry, but this is just more excuses. I honestly don't care about pirating. I just don't like all the whining and excuses I constantly hear to justify the pirating. The fact is it is easy to steal on PC and there is practicaly ZERO chance of getting caught or facing any consequences. That is the SOLE reason people do it. Anything else is just making excuses.

though $ is not the main excuse, but it does play certain role here. Otherwise why would 3rd world countries always have less respect to intelligent property? i am not saying it's a right to do, but what can you do? nuke them? lol

In 1st world countries, there are more pirated games on pc because it's much easier to find and use than pirated games on console. Availablitiy and accessibility are main reason that pc gamers tend to pirate games more than console. What can you do with it? blame government. stealing $60 goods in supermarket is a serious crime, but no penalty to ppl who pirate $60 games.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"][QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

So now the arguement is that pirates don't have the money to buy the games so they HAVE to pirate them? Sorry, but this is just more excuses. I honestly don't care about pirating. I just don't like all the whining and excuses I constantly hear to justify the pirating. The fact is it is easy to steal on PC and there is practicaly ZERO chance of getting caught or facing any consequences. That is the SOLE reason people do it. Anything else is just making excuses.

ZIMdoom

Then you should take it out on the people you know who have pirated the game. Developers have every right to protect their product. YOU do NOT have some unspoken right to play games. NOBODY has ANY right to steal games for any reason.

Therefore, what you like or don't like is irrelevant.

what i like is not irrelevant as i am a consumer and i purchase a lot of games, so when i am pushed away from a purchase that matters more then your trash view that consumers should be arrested for doing nothing wrong because other pirate.

i just dont play games with DRMs, skipped spore and will skip asscread2, but any company that takes their consuming base for granted deserves a black eye or even to go under. sony got their black eye this gen with the ps3 i can only hope the same for these publishers. they work for us they are the producers and we the consumers and if they think we will stand for being treated like idiots, criminals, or what have you they should not be on the market. i always have confidence in the market, people are not as dumb as some would have you believe and actions like this will not go unpunished. may they burn, may they die, and may others learn the lesson that you work for those who fund you and not the other way around. i would not shed a single tear if the publisher went under for doing these things, hell i may even throw a party.

what i like is not irrelevant as i am a consumer and i purchase a lot of games, so when i am pushed away from a purchase that matters more then your trash view that consumers should be arrested for doing nothing wrong because other pirate.

surrealnumber5

Well then we will have to agree to disagree because the way I see it, if we use your logic of the magic of markets...then the market has already spoken and developers should just work for free. Because PC users have spoken and said that they don't want to buy games. They just want to steal them. And since the market has spoken, then I don't think you or any other PC user have any right to complain about PC developers going elsewhere. Clearly they are just listening to the market and the console market is saying "We will buy your games and very few will steal them."

Second, unlike you, I actually do believe that people are stupid. And I don't consider myself any smarter either. Because the fact is, NOBODY is capable of always making a logical informed decision at ALL TIMES with every dollar they spend. to argue that people are smart and "markets" magically work IS making that claim IMHO and I disagree with that. History and experience have PROVEN time and time again that people will routinely act AGAINST their own best interests in favour of satifying their own selfish SELF interests. I think our culture of debt, our electing of politicians who openly favour the rich, the banking crises, Enron, and yes, PC piracy,ALL back my own position.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

i just dont play games with DRMs, skipped spore and will skip asscread2, but any company that takes their consuming base for granted deserves a black eye or even to go under. sony got their black eye this gen with the ps3 i can only hope the same for these publishers. they work for us they are the producers and we the consumers and if they think we will stand for being treated like idiots, criminals, or what have you they should not be on the market. i always have confidence in the market, people are not as dumb as some would have you believe and actions like this will not go unpunished. may they burn, may they die, and may others learn the lesson that you work for those who fund you and not the other way around. i would not shed a single tear if the publisher went under for doing these things, hell i may even throw a party.

what i like is not irrelevant as i am a consumer and i purchase a lot of games, so when i am pushed away from a purchase that matters more then your trash view that consumers should be arrested for doing nothing wrong because other pirate.

ZIMdoom

Well then we will have to agree to disagree because the way I see it, if we use your logic of the magic of markets...then the market has already spoken and developers should just work for free. Because PC users have spoken and said that they don't want to buy games. They just want to steal them. And since the market has spoken, then I don't think you or any other PC user have any right to complain about PC developers going elsewhere. Clearly they are just listening to the market and the console market is saying "We will buy your games and very few will steal them."

Second, unlike you, I actually do believe that people are stupid. And I don't consider myself any smarter either. Because the fact is, NOBODY is capable of always making a logical informed decision at ALL TIMES with every dollar they spend. to argue that people are smart and "markets" magically work IS making that claim IMHO and I disagree with that. History and experience have PROVEN time and time again that people will routinely act AGAINST their own best interests in favour of satifying their own selfish SELF interests. I think our culture of debt, our electing of politicians who openly favour the rich, the banking crises, Enron, and yes, PC piracy,ALL back my own position.

-Wardell

Wardell cites the lack of copy protection on Sins of a Solar Empire as one of the myth busters to piracy killing PC gaming.

I wouldnt be proud for the corporate capitalistic system.....

Wardell cites the lack of copy protection on Sins of a Solar Empire as one of the myth busters to piracy killing PC gaming.surrealnumber5

The reason why we don't put copy protection on our games isn't because we're nice guys. We do it because the people who actually buy games don't like to mess with it. Our customers make the rules, not the pirates. Pirates don't count. We know our customers could pirate our games if they want but choose to support our efforts. So we return the favor – we make the games they want and deliver them how they want it. This is also known as operating like every other industry outside the PC game industry. … In the meantime, if you want to make profitable PC games, I'd recommend focusing more effort on satisfying the people willing to spend money on your product and less effort on making what others perceive as hot. But then again, I don't romanticize PC game development. I just want to play cool games and make a profit on games that I work on.

-Wardell

Wardell cites the lack of copy protection on Sins of a Solar Empire as one of the myth busters to piracy killing PC gaming.

surrealnumber5

Look, I agree with that sentiment. Pandora's box has been opened and there is little anyone can do to close it. It is a waste of time and money to try and stop piracy no matter what industry you are in. I agree with that.

However, that is totally and completely off topic in terms of this discussion. The topic being two-fold as I see it. 1) Developers have a RIGHT to try and put copy protection on their games. That is just a fact. And there seems to be ZERO evidence that this hurts consumers in any way. 2) That pirates only pirate games for noble reasons, or they only pirate games they have no interest in paying money for. Frankly, I think this is BS for reasons I have already stated.

In response to his comments, I would question HOW he knows his consumers and how he knows that making a game those consumers want guarantees they will buy it as opposed to pirating it. He has no way of proving that. All he is doing is saying X people bought our game, so that means we appealed to X number of poeple. That is our customer base. But it would seem to me that as piracy continues to grow, and people here claim how horrible it is when friends mock them for buying games, that customer base will shrink. Therefore, at some point, nothing they do will make them more profitable. At some point, they will feel the impact of piracy UNLESS they can continually cut costs to compensate for increasing piracy.

Finally, I would close by saying that the lack of copy protection on Sins of a Solar Empire is "one of the myt busters to piracy killing pC gaming." I don't see how one game making money somehow disproves the damage caused by piracy. That's like saying people shopping at Walmart disproves there is a recession.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

The reason why we don't put copy protection on our games isn't because we're nice guys. We do it because the people who actually buy games don't like to mess with it. Our customers make the rules, not the pirates. Pirates don't count. We know our customers could pirate our games if they want but choose to support our efforts. So we return the favor – we make the games they want and deliver them how they want it. This is also known as operating like every other industry outside the PC game industry. … In the meantime, if you want to make profitable PC games, I'd recommend focusing more effort on satisfying the people willing to spend money on your product and less effort on making what others perceive as hot. But then again, I don't romanticize PC game development. I just want to play cool games and make a profit on games that I work on.

-Wardell

Wardell cites the lack of copy protection on Sins of a Solar Empire as one of the myth busters to piracy killing PC gaming.

ZIMdoom

Look, I agree with that sentiment. Pandora's box has been opened and there is little anyone can do to close it. It is a waste of time and money to try and stop piracy no matter what industry you are in. I agree with that.

However, that is totally and completely off topic in terms of this discussion. The topic being two-fold as I see it. 1) Developers have a RIGHT to try and put copy protection on their games. That is just a fact. And there seems to be ZERO evidence that this hurts consumers in any way. 2) That pirates only pirate games for noble reasons, or they only pirate games they have no interest in paying money for. Frankly, I think this is BS for reasons I have already stated.

In response to his comments, I would question HOW he knows his consumers and how he knows that making a game those consumers want guarantees they will buy it as opposed to pirating it. He has no way of proving that. All he is doing is saying X people bought our game, so that means we appealed to X number of poeple. That is our customer base. But it would seem to me that as piracy continues to grow, and people here claim how horrible it is when friends mock them for buying games, that customer base will shrink. Therefore, at some point, nothing they do will make them more profitable. At some point, they will feel the impact of piracy UNLESS they can continually cut costs to compensate for increasing piracy.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

The reason why we don't put copy protection on our games isn't because we're nice guys. We do it because the people who actually buy games don't like to mess with it. Our customers make the rules, not the pirates. Pirates don't count. We know our customers could pirate our games if they want but choose to support our efforts. So we return the favor – we make the games they want and deliver them how they want it. This is also known as operating like every other industry outside the PC game industry. … In the meantime, if you want to make profitable PC games, I'd recommend focusing more effort on satisfying the people willing to spend money on your product and less effort on making what others perceive as hot. But then again, I don't romanticize PC game development. I just want to play cool games and make a profit on games that I work on.

-Wardell

Wardell cites the lack of copy protection on Sins of a Solar Empire as one of the myth busters to piracy killing PC gaming.

ZIMdoom

Look, I agree with that sentiment. Pandora's box has been opened and there is little anyone can do to close it. It is a waste of time and money to try and stop piracy no matter what industry you are in. I agree with that.

However, that is totally and completely off topic in terms of this discussion. The topic being two-fold as I see it. 1) Developers have a RIGHT to try and put copy protection on their games. That is just a fact. And there seems to be ZERO evidence that this hurts consumers in any way. 2) That pirates only pirate games for noble reasons, or they only pirate games they have no interest in paying money for. Frankly, I think this is BS for reasons I have already stated.

In response to his comments, I would question HOW he knows his consumers and how he knows that making a game those consumers want guarantees they will buy it as opposed to pirating it. He has no way of proving that. All he is doing is saying X people bought our game, so that means we appealed to X number of poeple. That is our customer base. But it would seem to me that as piracy continues to grow, and people here claim how horrible it is when friends mock them for buying games, that customer base will shrink. Therefore, at some point, nothing they do will make them more profitable. At some point, they will feel the impact of piracy UNLESS they can continually cut costs to compensate for increasing piracy.

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

The reason why we don't put copy protection on our games isn't because we're nice guys. We do it because the people who actually buy games don't like to mess with it. Our customers make the rules, not the pirates. Pirates don't count. We know our customers could pirate our games if they want but choose to support our efforts. So we return the favor – we make the games they want and deliver them how they want it. This is also known as operating like every other industry outside the PC game industry. … In the meantime, if you want to make profitable PC games, I'd recommend focusing more effort on satisfying the people willing to spend money on your product and less effort on making what others perceive as hot. But then again, I don't romanticize PC game development. I just want to play cool games and make a profit on games that I work on.

-Wardell

Wardell cites the lack of copy protection on Sins of a Solar Empire as one of the myth busters to piracy killing PC gaming.

True_Gamer_

Look, I agree with that sentiment. Pandora's box has been opened and there is little anyone can do to close it. It is a waste of time and money to try and stop piracy no matter what industry you are in. I agree with that.

However, that is totally and completely off topic in terms of this discussion. The topic being two-fold as I see it. 1) Developers have a RIGHT to try and put copy protection on their games. That is just a fact. And there seems to be ZERO evidence that this hurts consumers in any way. 2) That pirates only pirate games for noble reasons, or they only pirate games they have no interest in paying money for. Frankly, I think this is BS for reasons I have already stated.

In response to his comments, I would question HOW he knows his consumers and how he knows that making a game those consumers want guarantees they will buy it as opposed to pirating it. He has no way of proving that. All he is doing is saying X people bought our game, so that means we appealed to X number of poeple. That is our customer base. But it would seem to me that as piracy continues to grow, and people here claim how horrible it is when friends mock them for buying games, that customer base will shrink. Therefore, at some point, nothing they do will make them more profitable. At some point, they will feel the impact of piracy UNLESS they can continually cut costs to compensate for increasing piracy.

i dont now nor will ever defend pirates, but i will forever curse and attack those that take freedoms from those who are genuine consumers. if you alienate your purchasing body you have a bad business model and should go under. if a company needs to cut costs to continue to provide what the consuming body wants, well then, so be it. they are business and should act as such. that is my only point in this discussion. the fact that i have seen people use pirating as a demo system for games they then buy or get rid of and never play again is a moot point. i dont do it and never will but any company that wants to commit Seppuku by treating their consumers like crooks deserves their fate.surrealnumber5

Genuine question as a non-pc gamer - how have your freedoms, or the freedoms of any gamer, been taken away? My understanding of Copywrite is that you do not own the content on the disc and therefore can not do whatever you want with it. Sure, there is always the case of fair use, but courts have shown to rule in the favor of the business's interests way more than the interest of the user.

I also don't see how DRM will hurt the company. Because the way it seems to typically work is not a choice between DRM or no DRM...it is between DRM or no pc development. In the end, it isn't the business that gets hurt, only the consumer. And I honestly question whether they have anyone but themselves to blame in this instance.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]i dont now nor will ever defend pirates, but i will forever curse and attack those that take freedoms from those who are genuine consumers. if you alienate your purchasing body you have a bad business model and should go under. if a company needs to cut costs to continue to provide what the consuming body wants, well then, so be it. they are business and should act as such. that is my only point in this discussion. the fact that i have seen people use pirating as a demo system for games they then buy or get rid of and never play again is a moot point. i dont do it and never will but any company that wants to commit Seppuku by treating their consumers like crooks deserves their fate.ZIMdoom

Genuine question as a non-pc gamer - how have your freedoms, or the freedoms of any gamer, been taken away? My understanding of Copywrite is that you do not own the content on the disc and therefore can not do whatever you want with it. Sure, there is always the case of fair use, but courts have shown to rule in the favor of the business's interests way more than the interest of the user.

I also don't see how DRM will hurt the company. Because the way it seems to typically work is not a choice between DRM or no DRM...it is between DRM or no pc development. In the end, it isn't the business that gets hurt, only the consumer. And I honestly question whether they have anyone but themselves to blame in this instance.

Explain the prewoned market to me based on the bold part.

Capitalism is based on the exploitation of another human being. Now in a merry capitalist system everyone is entitled to make as much money as possible. Morals have no place in capitalism. So can one preach morals defending a corporation that doesnt give **** about morals? I dont think so.True_Gamer_

I fail to see your point or what you are responding to. I have never claimed anything regarding morals. My point is simple. Companies have a RIGHT to protect their product. They have a right to try and increase profits by looking for ways to combat piracy.

Meanwhile, consumers have NO right to purchase a product and/or do whatever they want with said product.

I also make no moral arguement regarding piracy. My point is that if piracy is hurting developers, then developers will look elsewhere for their profits and support. That may very well mean no longer supporting the PC. But what I disagree with is PC users then turning around complaining about this move, while simultaneously trying to argue Piracy really isn't a problem AND that developers deserve to have their games pirates. These are just excuses. People pirate games because it is quick, easy, and costs nothing to do so and there is practicaly zero chance of being punished for it. Yet they routinely try to make excuses and rationalize their actions to make it seem "okay" while they stomp their feet and cry about PC developers leaving or trying to take actions to stop piracy.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]i dont now nor will ever defend pirates, but i will forever curse and attack those that take freedoms from those who are genuine consumers. if you alienate your purchasing body you have a bad business model and should go under. if a company needs to cut costs to continue to provide what the consuming body wants, well then, so be it. they are business and should act as such. that is my only point in this discussion. the fact that i have seen people use pirating as a demo system for games they then buy or get rid of and never play again is a moot point. i dont do it and never will but any company that wants to commit Seppuku by treating their consumers like crooks deserves their fate.ZIMdoom

Genuine question as a non-pc gamer - how have your freedoms, or the freedoms of any gamer, been taken away? My understanding of Copywrite is that you do not own the content on the disc and therefore can not do whatever you want with it. Sure, there is always the case of fair use, but courts have shown to rule in the favor of the business's interests way more than the interest of the user.

I also don't see how DRM will hurt the company. Because the way it seems to typically work is not a choice between DRM or no DRM...it is between DRM or no pc development. In the end, it isn't the business that gets hurt, only the consumer. And I honestly question whether they have anyone but themselves to blame in this instance.

Ubisoft highlights the ability to install the game on any machine you want as a great advantage of their DRM... It's a sad statement about the state of the industry and DRM today.

This DRM (is it called Orbit?) is horrible because it dictates your access to the game by relying on a third party. It becomes arbitrary, since you have no influence whatsoever on your ISP's activity and reliability.

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]i dont now nor will ever defend pirates, but i will forever curse and attack those that take freedoms from those who are genuine consumers. if you alienate your purchasing body you have a bad business model and should go under. if a company needs to cut costs to continue to provide what the consuming body wants, well then, so be it. they are business and should act as such. that is my only point in this discussion. the fact that i have seen people use pirating as a demo system for games they then buy or get rid of and never play again is a moot point. i dont do it and never will but any company that wants to commit Seppuku by treating their consumers like crooks deserves their fate.True_Gamer_

Genuine question as a non-pc gamer - how have your freedoms, or the freedoms of any gamer, been taken away? My understanding of Copywrite is that you do not own the content on the disc and therefore can not do whatever you want with it. Sure, there is always the case of fair use, but courts have shown to rule in the favor of the business's interests way more than the interest of the user.

I also don't see how DRM will hurt the company. Because the way it seems to typically work is not a choice between DRM or no DRM...it is between DRM or no pc development. In the end, it isn't the business that gets hurt, only the consumer. And I honestly question whether they have anyone but themselves to blame in this instance.

Explain the prewoned market to me based on the bold part.

You bought a disc with a game on it and therefore a license to play the game on that particular disc. As owner of the disc and the license associated with that disc, you are entitled to sell it to another person.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]i dont now nor will ever defend pirates, but i will forever curse and attack those that take freedoms from those who are genuine consumers. if you alienate your purchasing body you have a bad business model and should go under. if a company needs to cut costs to continue to provide what the consuming body wants, well then, so be it. they are business and should act as such. that is my only point in this discussion. the fact that i have seen people use pirating as a demo system for games they then buy or get rid of and never play again is a moot point. i dont do it and never will but any company that wants to commit Seppuku by treating their consumers like crooks deserves their fate.ZIMdoom

Genuine question as a non-pc gamer - how have your freedoms, or the freedoms of any gamer, been taken away? My understanding of Copywrite is that you do not own the content on the disc and therefore can not do whatever you want with it. Sure, there is always the case of fair use, but courts have shown to rule in the favor of the business's interests way more than the interest of the user.

I also don't see how DRM will hurt the company. Because the way it seems to typically work is not a choice between DRM or no DRM...it is between DRM or no pc development. In the end, it isn't the business that gets hurt, only the consumer. And I honestly question whether they have anyone but themselves to blame in this instance.

as for the DRM thing EA got a huge backlash when it tried it in SPORE and SONY's root kits in their music CD's, both companies have since abandon such harsh measures. they still go after pirates but they dont do so in such an intrusive ways. business do get hurt when people and the press speak out against them. word of mouth is the most powerful product driver or killer in the market. not to turn this into a sales thread, even though it already is, there has not been a single system or game that had prolonged sales that did not have the peoples word behind it. there have been some flash in the pan games that have had good sales but that is not what i am talking about here. games like MGS4, Halo 3, gears of war, SMG, wii fit, smash bro. and many others all had great initial sales that were pushed forward for months even years because of word of mouth sales. if you put out products that put odd situations on the consumer you get a game like spore that was marketed and designed to be the next SIMS game and it could have been, but instead it ended up with meh sales.

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"]

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

Genuine question as a non-pc gamer - how have your freedoms, or the freedoms of any gamer, been taken away? My understanding of Copywrite is that you do not own the content on the disc and therefore can not do whatever you want with it. Sure, there is always the case of fair use, but courts have shown to rule in the favor of the business's interests way more than the interest of the user.

I also don't see how DRM will hurt the company. Because the way it seems to typically work is not a choice between DRM or no DRM...it is between DRM or no pc development. In the end, it isn't the business that gets hurt, only the consumer. And I honestly question whether they have anyone but themselves to blame in this instance.

ZIMdoom

Explain the prewoned market to me based on the bold part.

You bought a disc with a game on it and therefore a license to play the game on that particular disc. As owner of the disc and the license associated with that disc, you are entitled to sell it to another person.

So you own the license?

:shock:

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"]Capitalism is based on the exploitation of another human being. Now in a merry capitalist system everyone is entitled to make as much money as possible. Morals have no place in capitalism. So can one preach morals defending a corporation that doesnt give **** about morals? I dont think so.ZIMdoom

I fail to see your point or what you are responding to. I have never claimed anything regarding morals. My point is simple. Companies have a RIGHT to protect their product. They have a right to try and increase profits by looking for ways to combat piracy.

Meanwhile, consumers have NO right to purchase a product and/or do whatever they want with said product.

I also make no moral arguement regarding piracy. My point is that if piracy is hurting developers, then developers will look elsewhere for their profits and support. That may very well mean no longer supporting the PC. But what I disagree with is PC users then turning around complaining about this move, while simultaneously trying to argue Piracy really isn't a problem AND that developers deserve to have their games pirates. These are just excuses. People pirate games because it is quick, easy, and costs nothing to do so and there is practicaly zero chance of being punished for it. Yet they routinely try to make excuses and rationalize their actions to make it seem "okay" while they stomp their feet and cry about PC developers leaving or trying to take actions to stop piracy.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

The reason why we don't put copy protection on our games isn't because we're nice guys. We do it because the people who actually buy games don't like to mess with it. Our customers make the rules, not the pirates. Pirates don't count. We know our customers could pirate our games if they want but choose to support our efforts. So we return the favor – we make the games they want and deliver them how they want it. This is also known as operating like every other industry outside the PC game industry. … In the meantime, if you want to make profitable PC games, I'd recommend focusing more effort on satisfying the people willing to spend money on your product and less effort on making what others perceive as hot. But then again, I don't romanticize PC game development. I just want to play cool games and make a profit on games that I work on.

-Wardell

Wardell cites the lack of copy protection on Sins of a Solar Empire as one of the myth busters to piracy killing PC gaming.

ZIMdoom

Look, I agree with that sentiment. Pandora's box has been opened and there is little anyone can do to close it. It is a waste of time and money to try and stop piracy no matter what industry you are in. I agree with that.

However, that is totally and completely off topic in terms of this discussion. The topic being two-fold as I see it. 1) Developers have a RIGHT to try and put copy protection on their games. That is just a fact. And there seems to be ZERO evidence that this hurts consumers in any way. 2) That pirates only pirate games for noble reasons, or they only pirate games they have no interest in paying money for. Frankly, I think this is BS for reasons I have already stated.

In response to his comments, I would question HOW he knows his consumers and how he knows that making a game those consumers want guarantees they will buy it as opposed to pirating it. He has no way of proving that. All he is doing is saying X people bought our game, so that means we appealed to X number of poeple. That is our customer base. But it would seem to me that as piracy continues to grow, and people here claim how horrible it is when friends mock them for buying games, that customer base will shrink. Therefore, at some point, nothing they do will make them more profitable. At some point, they will feel the impact of piracy UNLESS they can continually cut costs to compensate for increasing piracy.

Finally, I would close by saying that the lack of copy protection on Sins of a Solar Empire is "one of the myt busters to piracy killing pC gaming." I don't see how one game making money somehow disproves the damage caused by piracy. That's like saying people shopping at Walmart disproves there is a recession.

Look, you are kinda getting tangled in your own arguments. First of all, i'll address your points..

1. You are completely right, developers have a right to protect their software any way they see fit. They can make it so you must reinstall your game 10x and sing "umbrella" backwards every time you want to play it, but in the end, the customers are the ones that decide if they want to pay for a product like that. If i'm buying a game, i want to buy a game, i don't want to buy a tedious DRM activation that for some reason may not work as intended or will not comply in certain situations etc etc. I don't want that, i just want the game. And it's already proven on this topic several times that some people, even though they want to play it, and are buying games regularly, won't buy AC2 because of it's DRM. And i'm kinda certain they are doing that for a reason and therefore your "ZERO evidence" argument is wrong.

2. Nobody is citing piracy as something noble. If you want to stick to the discussion and add to it, please don't make things up or exaggerate. Not one person here said that. Some did condone it as means of making publishers change their stance towards DRM protections, but that is also wrong.

Like i already said, and i'll say it again, people pirating games never had the intention of buying them in the first place. You say it's a strawman argument, but then again, you are wrong. Of all the friends i have, not one is buying original software. Some of them are loaded with money, yet again they were the same people that were opening their PC cases so they could unplugg their DVD to bypass copy protection on Prince of Persia: Two thrones. They could have bought 10xPoP:tt yet they went through tedious process of trying to activate the pirated version which might not even work. And some just refused to play it. They didn't buy it, they just didn't want to be bothered with it until propper crack appeared. So, as i said, they are pirates, and pirates are people who had no intention of buying the software in the first place.

And to your comments on Wardell's quote.. 1 milion sold proves him right. That's all i need to say, and that's all you need to realise. 1 million from a game with no copy protection what so ever. 1 million sold from a game with no copy protection and on a market infested by pirates. And all you can say is "but hey, that doesn't prove anything!!!1!1". It actually proves everything. It proves that quality game is appreciated and that propper respect to your customer is also appreciated.

Companies will always mention piracy as a prime and only reason their game is not selling..

-Hey, maybe your game is bad, ever think of that, maybe its not worth $50.

-Nonono it's the dang pirates, pirating it all day long. Lemme put this fine DRM on it, it will make the game 10x better and will even resurect lil kittens killed by dang pirates.

-Oh, i see now. You don't get to the crappy part right away but you have to pass tedious activation process to unlock the crap. I understand, that will make your game so much more appealing.

The reason why Sins of the solar empire is the only game supporting my claims is because Stardock was the only developer brave enough to release it without copy protection. If Ubisoft does that and their game sells 200 000 copies who would they have to blame? Pirates again, ofcourse, even more than before because the game now didn't have any copy protection. But neither did Sotse, so whats the catch.. Ah, some small game studio sold 5x more than monumental gitantic Ubisoft. So there's the catch, maybe it's not the pirates, maybe hyperproduction of games actually makes lesser quality games. Who would have thunk it. But worry not, because they would never allow that scenario to occour, so expect even more severe DRM in the future.

Piracy is wrong. Piracy is stealing. You can't win against it. But what you can do is improve the experience of the product for those people actually buying it. You are not hurting pirates by intrusive DRM on products, because they have nothing to do with it. They will crack it when the crack appears and that's that. The legitimate customers are the only ones getting the shaft here.

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"]

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

Genuine question as a non-pc gamer - how have your freedoms, or the freedoms of any gamer, been taken away? My understanding of Copywrite is that you do not own the content on the disc and therefore can not do whatever you want with it. Sure, there is always the case of fair use, but courts have shown to rule in the favor of the business's interests way more than the interest of the user.

I also don't see how DRM will hurt the company. Because the way it seems to typically work is not a choice between DRM or no DRM...it is between DRM or no pc development. In the end, it isn't the business that gets hurt, only the consumer. And I honestly question whether they have anyone but themselves to blame in this instance.

ZIMdoom

Explain the prewoned market to me based on the bold part.

You bought a disc with a game on it and therefore a license to play the game on that particular disc. As owner of the disc and the license associated with that disc, you are entitled to sell it to another person.

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"]

Explain the prewoned market to me based on the bold part.

True_Gamer_

You bought a disc with a game on it and therefore a license to play the game on that particular disc. As owner of the disc and the license associated with that disc, you are entitled to sell it to another person.

So you own the license?

:shock:

People, i hear like you saying DRM is not needed... it is needed, theres need to be barrier disallow copyieg in easy way, it truly reduce piracy what ever you see.

Now guys think that you are poor man with codeing skill and you code game to live to get money without any form of DRM,you relese it and bang people copy it and show you big finger, this is reality, people want free insted of pay, theres need to be some sort of limitation. There need to be mark, a scar in form of crack that makes people think what they do is not right thing to do.

Diffrent topic how much is protected and i must aggre Ubisoft gone little to far, but reducing DRM to 0 is non-sence, specially in digital distribution, guess what... DRM made it possible

People, i hear like you saying DRM is not needed... it is needed, theres need to be barrier disallow copyieg in easy way, it truly reduce piracy what ever you see.

Now guys think that you are poor man with codeing skill and you code game to live to get money without any form of DRM,you relese it and bang people copy it and show you big finger, this is reality, people want free insted of pay, theres need to be some sort of limitation. There need to be mark, a scar in form of crack that makes people think what they do is not right thing to do.

Diffrent topic how much is protected and i must aggre Ubisoft gone little to far, but reducing DRM to 0 is non-sence, specially in digital distribution, guess what... DRM made it possible

ShadowriverUB

And instead of DRM, why not try positive reinforcement in the form of value-added incentives available only to who who buy the game new at retail?

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]i dont now nor will ever defend pirates, but i will forever curse and attack those that take freedoms from those who are genuine consumers. if you alienate your purchasing body you have a bad business model and should go under. if a company needs to cut costs to continue to provide what the consuming body wants, well then, so be it. they are business and should act as such. that is my only point in this discussion. the fact that i have seen people use pirating as a demo system for games they then buy or get rid of and never play again is a moot point. i dont do it and never will but any company that wants to commit Seppuku by treating their consumers like crooks deserves their fate.Baranga

Genuine question as a non-pc gamer - how have your freedoms, or the freedoms of any gamer, been taken away? My understanding of Copywrite is that you do not own the content on the disc and therefore can not do whatever you want with it. Sure, there is always the case of fair use, but courts have shown to rule in the favor of the business's interests way more than the interest of the user.

I also don't see how DRM will hurt the company. Because the way it seems to typically work is not a choice between DRM or no DRM...it is between DRM or no pc development. In the end, it isn't the business that gets hurt, only the consumer. And I honestly question whether they have anyone but themselves to blame in this instance.

Ubisoft highlights the ability to install the game on any machine you want as a great advantage of their DRM... It's a sad statement about the state of the industry and DRM today.

This DRM (is it called Orbit?) is horrible because it dictates your access to the game by relying on a third party. It becomes arbitrary, since you have no influence whatsoever on your ISP's activity and reliability.

You already rely on third parties for access to your games. You rely on them to make hardware that works and OS's that won't crash. You rely on them for electricity to your house.

So what happens if you are in the middle of a game and the power goes out? Or your system crashes? Is that impeding on your freedoms and supposed RIGHT to play games without interuption? If your internet is that spotty, then that says more about the terrible internet service (and over priced) we have than it does about UbiSoft.

[QUOTE="ShadowriverUB"]

People, i hear like you saying DRM is not needed... it is needed, theres need to be barrier disallow copyieg in easy way, it truly reduce piracy what ever you see.

Now guys think that you are poor man with codeing skill and you code game to live to get money without any form of DRM,you relese it and bang people copy it and show you big finger, this is reality, people want free insted of pay, theres need to be some sort of limitation. There need to be mark, a scar in form of crack that makes people think what they do is not right thing to do.

Diffrent topic how much is protected and i must aggre Ubisoft gone little to far, but reducing DRM to 0 is non-sence, specially in digital distribution, guess what... DRM made it possible

HuusAsking

And instead of DRM, why not try positive reinforcement in the form of value-added incentives available only to who who buy the game new at retail?

I don't get this idea that Sins of a Solar Empire is a rebuttal. Look at the music industry. Some companies are fighting tooth and nail against piracy, some artists don't care either way, and some are now giving their music away for free and making money in other ways. they all have their own perspective, but NONE of it takes away from the fact that music piracy is out of control. And artists not caring and just releasing CDs as always is not a rebuttal to the piracy problem.

So you own the license?

:shock:

True_Gamer_

When you buy ANYgame, music or movie, you don't OWN the gaame/song/movie. You are only buying the rights to play/listen/view the content in the privacy of your own home.

You own the rights to play/view the contents of that medium and that is all you have really purchased according to the law. As the owner of the medium and the rights to view that medium, you therefore have the right to sell it to someone else. So buying a USED game is buying a used disc as well as the right/license to view the conents. You NEVER have the right (legally speaking) to control the music and do what you want with it.

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"]

[QUOTE="ShadowriverUB"]

People, i hear like you saying DRM is not needed... it is needed, theres need to be barrier disallow copyieg in easy way, it truly reduce piracy what ever you see.

Now guys think that you are poor man with codeing skill and you code game to live to get money without any form of DRM,you relese it and bang people copy it and show you big finger, this is reality, people want free insted of pay, theres need to be some sort of limitation. There need to be mark, a scar in form of crack that makes people think what they do is not right thing to do.

Diffrent topic how much is protected and i must aggre Ubisoft gone little to far, but reducing DRM to 0 is non-sence, specially in digital distribution, guess what... DRM made it possible

And instead of DRM, why not try positive reinforcement in the form of value-added incentives available only to who who buy the game new at retail?

I don't get this idea that Sins of a Solar Empire is a rebuttal. Look at the music industry. Some companies are fighting tooth and nail against piracy, some artists don't care either way, and some are now giving their music away for free and making money in other ways. they all have their own perspective, but NONE of it takes away from the fact that music piracy is out of control. And artists not caring and just releasing CDs as always is not a rebuttal to the piracy problem.

That's the way I see it, too. Too bad some publishers don't see it that way. Nor does Valve when it comes to DD games at this point (doesn't Valve class its Steam transactions as "purchases"--meaning sales?).HuusAsking

Well, that is why so many companies LOVE DD and want to push it as the new format. Since you are no longer buying a disc, and the rights to view that disc, then you no longer have the ability to sell that content to someone else. You are essentially agreeing to a non-transferable license.

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"]That's the way I see it, too. Too bad some publishers don't see it that way. Nor does Valve when it comes to DD games at this point (doesn't Valve class its Steam transactions as "purchases"--meaning sales?).ZIMdoom

Well, that is why so many companies LOVE DD and want to push it as the new format. Since you are no longer buying a disc, and the rights to view that disc, then you no longer have the ability to sell that content to someone else. You are essentially agreeing to a non-transferable license.

corporations should not have any morals, the only thing that should matter to them is profit and this DRM stuff only hurts. EA learned this, sony learned it with their root kit music BSsurrealnumber5

I disagree with this strongly. Corporations are a social structure, granted special rights by government that society elects, must be regulated by society and that relies on society for labour, resources, sales, and profits. So to act like they have no social responsibility or "morals" is wrong IMHO. I honestlybelieve that corporations are the reason for the majority of problems we as a society experience and they supposed benefit they provide could easily be filled in other, less sociopathic ways.

However, I also find it ironic that the person arguing that corporations should NOT have morals and ONLY care about profits, then turns around and complains about those same corporations taking steps to protect their creative content so they can profit more. That is what DRM is.

[QUOTE="Baranga"]

Ubisoft highlights the ability to install the game on any machine you want as a great advantage of their DRM... It's a sad statement about the state of the industry and DRM today.

This DRM (is it called Orbit?) is horrible because it dictates your access to the game by relying on a third party. It becomes arbitrary, since you have no influence whatsoever on your ISP's activity and reliability.

ZIMdoom

You already rely on third parties for access to your games. You rely on them to make hardware that works and OS's that won't crash. You rely on them for electricity to your house.

So what happens if you are in the middle of a game and the power goes out? Or your system crashes? Is that impeding on your freedoms and supposed RIGHT to play games without interuption? If your internet is that spotty, then that says more about the terrible internet service (and over priced) we have than it does about UbiSoft.

Taking your laptop with you in a holiday and being unable to play the game is a lot different from a HDD failure.

Power shortages and hardware failures are and always were expected and accepted risks. Nobody complains about that, especially since most problems can be your fault. This DRM adds a completely unnecessary risk layer on top of them. ISP problems are also a lot more prevalent than all the above - the infrastructure in Western countries is old and unreliable, and they're absolutely insignificant when compared to hardware or power failure. As Rock, Paper, Shotgun puts it, It's like someone taking away your food mid-meal because your napkin's fallen on the floor.

Look, you are kinda getting tangled in your own arguments. First of all, i'll address your points..

1. You are completely right, developers have a right to protect their software any way they see fit. They can make it so you must reinstall your game 10x and sing "umbrella" backwards every time you want to play it, but in the end, the customers are the ones that decide if they want to pay for a product like that. If i'm buying a game, i want to buy a game, i don't want to buy a tedious DRM activation that for some reason may not work as intended or will not comply in certain situations etc etc. I don't want that, i just want the game. And it's already proven on this topic several times that some people, even though they want to play it, and are buying games regularly, won't buy AC2 because of it's DRM. And i'm kinda certain they are doing that for a reason and therefore your "ZERO evidence" argument is wrong.

2. Nobody is citing piracy as something noble. If you want to stick to the discussion and add to it, please don't make things up or exaggerate. Not one person here said that. Some did condone it as means of making publishers change their stance towards DRM protections, but that is also wrong.

Like i already said, and i'll say it again, people pirating games never had the intention of buying them in the first place. You say it's a strawman argument, but then again, you are wrong. Of all the friends i have, not one is buying original software. Some of them are loaded with money, yet again they were the same people that were opening their PC cases so they could unplugg their DVD to bypass copy protection on Prince of Persia: Two thrones. They could have bought 10xPoP:tt yet they went through tedious process of trying to activate the pirated version which might not even work. And some just refused to play it. They didn't buy it, they just didn't want to be bothered with it until propper crack appeared. So, as i said, they are pirates, and pirates are people who had no intention of buying the software in the first place.

And to your comments on Wardell's quote.. 1 milion sold proves him right. That's all i need to say, and that's all you need to realise. 1 million from a game with no copy protection what so ever. 1 million sold from a game with no copy protection and on a market infested by pirates. And all you can say is "but hey, that doesn't prove anything!!!1!1". It actually proves everything. It proves that quality game is appreciated and that propper respect to your customer is also appreciated.

Companies will always mention piracy as a prime and only reason their game is not selling..

-Hey, maybe your game is bad, ever think of that, maybe its not worth $50.

-Nonono it's the dang pirates, pirating it all day long. Lemme put this fine DRM on it, it will make the game 10x better and will even resurect lil kittens killed by dang pirates.

-Oh, i see now. You don't get to the crappy part right away but you have to pass tedious activation process to unlock the crap. I understand, that will make your game so much more appealing.

The reason why Sins of the solar empire is the only game supporting my claims is because Stardock was the only developer brave enough to release it without copy protection. If Ubisoft does that and their game sells 200 000 copies who would they have to blame? Pirates again, ofcourse, even more than before because the game now didn't have any copy protection. But neither did Sotse, so whats the catch.. Ah, some small game studio sold 5x more than monumental gitantic Ubisoft. So there's the catch, maybe it's not the pirates, maybe hyperproduction of games actually makes lesser quality games. Who would have thunk it. But worry not, because they would never allow that scenario to occour, so expect even more severe DRM in the future.

Piracy is wrong. Piracy is stealing. You can't win against it. But what you can do is improve the experience of the product for those people actually buying it. You are not hurting pirates by intrusive DRM on products, because they have nothing to do with it. They will crack it when the crack appears and that's that. The legitimate customers are the only ones getting the shaft here.

Chofee

I actually think my arguements are addressing one MAIN issue, and that is the idea that people (in general) want to pirate music, movies, games, or excuse those who do it, and yet they want to complain whenever companies take steps to protect their content or just stop supporting PC altogether.

I was exadgerating when I said people treat piracy like it is "noble", but it is no exadgeration to point out that almost EVERY PC user in this forum (and others I've read) has supported and defended pirates and people who are STEALING against the companies looking to control and profit of their own product.

I continue to call the arguement of "people who steal won't buy the game anyway" a straw man arguement. I've already stated why but I will state it again. If your friends have money, then why don't they buy the game? You can't logically say they don't REALLY want it because the fact they are taking the time and effort to pirate it in the first place is evidence they DO want to play it. No, they WOULD buy it if piracy wasn't so quick, easy and accepted (as displayed in this very forum). But since they live in a world where piracy is already available, easy, and acceptable...they CHOSE to steal.

Your friends aren't making the choice between buying the game and stealing it and deciding "oh I wouldn't buy it anyway". They are making a choice between stealing it, without repercussion, or paying money for it and chosing to steal it. The "I wouldn't buy it anyway" is just a rationalization after the fact. It's an excuse to justify their stealing. But the true test is the fact that if they didn't care about the game, or didn't think it was worth it, they wouldn't be playing it in the first place. And they certainly wouldn't be queueing up to download it the second it is available online.

They MAY have a case for that arguement IF they were downloading some game from 10 or 20 years ago that they clearly already chose NOT to buy. But that isn't what is happening. They are downloading brand new, big budget games so they can play them with everyone else as soon as they come out. That is like an adict saying "I can quit whenever I want" while still behaving like an adict.

[QUOTE="Chofee"]

Look, you are kinda getting tangled in your own arguments. First of all, i'll address your points..

1. You are completely right, developers have a right to protect their software any way they see fit. They can make it so you must reinstall your game 10x and sing "umbrella" backwards every time you want to play it, but in the end, the customers are the ones that decide if they want to pay for a product like that. If i'm buying a game, i want to buy a game, i don't want to buy a tedious DRM activation that for some reason may not work as intended or will not comply in certain situations etc etc. I don't want that, i just want the game. And it's already proven on this topic several times that some people, even though they want to play it, and are buying games regularly, won't buy AC2 because of it's DRM. And i'm kinda certain they are doing that for a reason and therefore your "ZERO evidence" argument is wrong.

2. Nobody is citing piracy as something noble. If you want to stick to the discussion and add to it, please don't make things up or exaggerate. Not one person here said that. Some did condone it as means of making publishers change their stance towards DRM protections, but that is also wrong.

Like i already said, and i'll say it again, people pirating games never had the intention of buying them in the first place. You say it's a strawman argument, but then again, you are wrong. Of all the friends i have, not one is buying original software. Some of them are loaded with money, yet again they were the same people that were opening their PC cases so they could unplugg their DVD to bypass copy protection on Prince of Persia: Two thrones. They could have bought 10xPoP:tt yet they went through tedious process of trying to activate the pirated version which might not even work. And some just refused to play it. They didn't buy it, they just didn't want to be bothered with it until propper crack appeared. So, as i said, they are pirates, and pirates are people who had no intention of buying the software in the first place.

And to your comments on Wardell's quote.. 1 milion sold proves him right. That's all i need to say, and that's all you need to realise. 1 million from a game with no copy protection what so ever. 1 million sold from a game with no copy protection and on a market infested by pirates. And all you can say is "but hey, that doesn't prove anything!!!1!1". It actually proves everything. It proves that quality game is appreciated and that propper respect to your customer is also appreciated.

Companies will always mention piracy as a prime and only reason their game is not selling..

-Hey, maybe your game is bad, ever think of that, maybe its not worth $50.

-Nonono it's the dang pirates, pirating it all day long. Lemme put this fine DRM on it, it will make the game 10x better and will even resurect lil kittens killed by dang pirates.

-Oh, i see now. You don't get to the crappy part right away but you have to pass tedious activation process to unlock the crap. I understand, that will make your game so much more appealing.

The reason why Sins of the solar empire is the only game supporting my claims is because Stardock was the only developer brave enough to release it without copy protection. If Ubisoft does that and their game sells 200 000 copies who would they have to blame? Pirates again, ofcourse, even more than before because the game now didn't have any copy protection. But neither did Sotse, so whats the catch.. Ah, some small game studio sold 5x more than monumental gitantic Ubisoft. So there's the catch, maybe it's not the pirates, maybe hyperproduction of games actually makes lesser quality games. Who would have thunk it. But worry not, because they would never allow that scenario to occour, so expect even more severe DRM in the future.

Piracy is wrong. Piracy is stealing. You can't win against it. But what you can do is improve the experience of the product for those people actually buying it. You are not hurting pirates by intrusive DRM on products, because they have nothing to do with it. They will crack it when the crack appears and that's that. The legitimate customers are the only ones getting the shaft here.

ZIMdoom

I actually think my arguements are addressing one MAIN issue, and that is the idea that people (in general) want to pirate music, movies, games, or excuse those who do it, and yet they want to complain whenever companies take steps to protect their content or just stop supporting PC altogether.

I was exadgerating when I said people treat piracy like it is "noble", but it is no exadgeration to point out that almost EVERY PC user in this forum (and others I've read) has supported and defended pirates and people who are STEALING against the companies looking to control and profit of their own product.

I continue to call the arguement of "people who steal won't buy the game anyway" a straw man arguement. I've already stated why but I will state it again. If your friends have money, then why don't they buy the game? You can't logically say they don't REALLY want it because the fact they are taking the time and effort to pirate it in the first place is evidence they DO want to play it. No, they WOULD buy it if piracy wasn't so quick, easy and accepted (as displayed in this very forum). But since they live in a world where piracy is already available, easy, and acceptable...they CHOSE to steal.

Your friends aren't making the choice between buying the game and stealing it and deciding "oh I wouldn't buy it anyway". They are making a choice between stealing it, without repercussion, or paying money for it and chosing to steal it. The "I wouldn't buy it anyway" is just a rationalization after the fact. It's an excuse to justify their stealing. But the true test is the fact that if they didn't care about the game, or didn't think it was worth it, they wouldn't be playing it in the first place. And they certainly wouldn't be queueing up to download it the second it is available online.

They MAY have a case for that arguement IF they were downloading some game from 10 or 20 years ago that they clearly already chose NOT to buy. But that isn't what is happening. They are downloading brand new, big budget games so they can play them with everyone else as soon as they come out. That is like an adict saying "I can quit whenever I want" while still behaving like an adict.

Can you explain to me why youre denying to accept the fact that THE LAW doesnt equate (thanks GOD) theft to copyright infrigment? Or you just use your opinion as a fact?

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

[QUOTE="Chofee"]

Look, you are kinda getting tangled in your own arguments. First of all, i'll address your points..

1. You are completely right, developers have a right to protect their software any way they see fit. They can make it so you must reinstall your game 10x and sing "umbrella" backwards every time you want to play it, but in the end, the customers are the ones that decide if they want to pay for a product like that. If i'm buying a game, i want to buy a game, i don't want to buy a tedious DRM activation that for some reason may not work as intended or will not comply in certain situations etc etc. I don't want that, i just want the game. And it's already proven on this topic several times that some people, even though they want to play it, and are buying games regularly, won't buy AC2 because of it's DRM. And i'm kinda certain they are doing that for a reason and therefore your "ZERO evidence" argument is wrong.

2. Nobody is citing piracy as something noble. If you want to stick to the discussion and add to it, please don't make things up or exaggerate. Not one person here said that. Some did condone it as means of making publishers change their stance towards DRM protections, but that is also wrong.

Like i already said, and i'll say it again, people pirating games never had the intention of buying them in the first place. You say it's a strawman argument, but then again, you are wrong. Of all the friends i have, not one is buying original software. Some of them are loaded with money, yet again they were the same people that were opening their PC cases so they could unplugg their DVD to bypass copy protection on Prince of Persia: Two thrones. They could have bought 10xPoP:tt yet they went through tedious process of trying to activate the pirated version which might not even work. And some just refused to play it. They didn't buy it, they just didn't want to be bothered with it until propper crack appeared. So, as i said, they are pirates, and pirates are people who had no intention of buying the software in the first place.

And to your comments on Wardell's quote.. 1 milion sold proves him right. That's all i need to say, and that's all you need to realise. 1 million from a game with no copy protection what so ever. 1 million sold from a game with no copy protection and on a market infested by pirates. And all you can say is "but hey, that doesn't prove anything!!!1!1". It actually proves everything. It proves that quality game is appreciated and that propper respect to your customer is also appreciated.

Companies will always mention piracy as a prime and only reason their game is not selling..

-Hey, maybe your game is bad, ever think of that, maybe its not worth $50.

-Nonono it's the dang pirates, pirating it all day long. Lemme put this fine DRM on it, it will make the game 10x better and will even resurect lil kittens killed by dang pirates.

-Oh, i see now. You don't get to the crappy part right away but you have to pass tedious activation process to unlock the crap. I understand, that will make your game so much more appealing.

The reason why Sins of the solar empire is the only game supporting my claims is because Stardock was the only developer brave enough to release it without copy protection. If Ubisoft does that and their game sells 200 000 copies who would they have to blame? Pirates again, ofcourse, even more than before because the game now didn't have any copy protection. But neither did Sotse, so whats the catch.. Ah, some small game studio sold 5x more than monumental gitantic Ubisoft. So there's the catch, maybe it's not the pirates, maybe hyperproduction of games actually makes lesser quality games. Who would have thunk it. But worry not, because they would never allow that scenario to occour, so expect even more severe DRM in the future.

Piracy is wrong. Piracy is stealing. You can't win against it. But what you can do is improve the experience of the product for those people actually buying it. You are not hurting pirates by intrusive DRM on products, because they have nothing to do with it. They will crack it when the crack appears and that's that. The legitimate customers are the only ones getting the shaft here.

True_Gamer_

I actually think my arguements are addressing one MAIN issue, and that is the idea that people (in general) want to pirate music, movies, games, or excuse those who do it, and yet they want to complain whenever companies take steps to protect their content or just stop supporting PC altogether.

I was exadgerating when I said people treat piracy like it is "noble", but it is no exadgeration to point out that almost EVERY PC user in this forum (and others I've read) has supported and defended pirates and people who are STEALING against the companies looking to control and profit of their own product.

I continue to call the arguement of "people who steal won't buy the game anyway" a straw man arguement. I've already stated why but I will state it again. If your friends have money, then why don't they buy the game? You can't logically say they don't REALLY want it because the fact they are taking the time and effort to pirate it in the first place is evidence they DO want to play it. No, they WOULD buy it if piracy wasn't so quick, easy and accepted (as displayed in this very forum). But since they live in a world where piracy is already available, easy, and acceptable...they CHOSE to steal.

Your friends aren't making the choice between buying the game and stealing it and deciding "oh I wouldn't buy it anyway". They are making a choice between stealing it, without repercussion, or paying money for it and chosing to steal it. The "I wouldn't buy it anyway" is just a rationalization after the fact. It's an excuse to justify their stealing. But the true test is the fact that if they didn't care about the game, or didn't think it was worth it, they wouldn't be playing it in the first place. And they certainly wouldn't be queueing up to download it the second it is available online.

They MAY have a case for that arguement IF they were downloading some game from 10 or 20 years ago that they clearly already chose NOT to buy. But that isn't what is happening. They are downloading brand new, big budget games so they can play them with everyone else as soon as they come out. That is like an adict saying "I can quit whenever I want" while still behaving like an adict.

Can you explain to me why youre denying to accept the fact that THE LAW doesnt equate (thanks GOD) theft to copyright infrigment? Or you just use your opinion as a fact?