Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

DRM

FactoidFactoid Registered User regular
edited February 2011 in Penny Arcade Games
There is a thread going on this over at the Greenhouse forum, but I figured my chances were better at getting a genuine PA response over here.

What's the deal with the DRM, man? You guys were bashing the DRM on Mass Effect / Spore, and here you are with a system that's about 80% as bad on your own game.

EA backed down on the 10-day reauth for their SecuROM secured games, but they maintained the part that was just as bad, and caused a similar fuss when Bioshock came out: Online activation and limited installations!

Tycho had this to say about DRM on PCs not too long ago.
It's the sort of thing that makes a person invest their leisure time with other machines, or - and this is awesome - pirate games they have themselves purchased by circumventing the check with a cracked exe. This is something I do almost one hundred percent of the time, because I can't be sure I'm receiving the full value of my hardware if I don't.

Are you giving me permission to crack your game now that I bought it?

I really and truly don't mind a ONE TIME authentication for a license key, but despite the claims of Hothead over at the Greenhouse forum, that's not what you've got on RSPD. It's true, I gather, that if I uninstall the game and then re-install again a few months later I won't have to re-authorize online. Great. But what if I buy a new computer? Or reload my OS? Or simply wipe out my user profile? That eats up another one of my 3 licenses.

I've already gone through 2 since yesterday. I installed it on my PC and on my Mac just because I wanted to see it on both.

In 10 years, will Greenhouse still be running? I hope so, it sounds like a great idea, but even companies as big as Microsoft have shut down DRM servers leaving paying customers hanging in the wind.

I feel hoodwinked. I bought this game, thinking I had a sure bet on my hands. What little I've played of the game so far has been great...but I'm not so sure that I'm going to ever see any of the other episodes because I don't want to own software that I don't really own. I want to play it again 10 years from now, and I want to do so without having to ask your permission.

Factoid on
«1345678

Posts

  • ZhirzzhZhirzzh Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    If I have this right, this is basically the system Mass Effect went to when they toned down the DRM. Would you say this is accurate?

    steam_sig.png
  • EmrysEmrys Registered User
    edited May 2008
    HH Vlad wrote: »
    The system was designed just to keep people honest not be a buzz kill.

    I appreciate the legitimate concern of theft but I don't need to be "kept" honest, thanks. Somewhere producers have to accept that DRM is a choice to distrust and alienate some customers based on belief some other set of their customers are interested in screwing them.
    Officially, yes, we don't want people to be passing their codes to everyone under the sun and from Hothead's perspective, I think we have a right to try to prevent that but not at the cost at getting in your face.

    It's your property; you have a right to tell me I can't play it unless I eat broken glass as far as I'm concerned. I similarly have a right to accept those terms or not.
    First, we designed it to allow you to take it to multiple computers or even switch to a different OS. As well, if you need more installs because you hit the initial limit, just ask. We are not going to be dicks. And if we ever go out of business, we will make sure you are taken care of regarding playing the game long into the future.

    Your mouth to God's ears... and if you ever go out of business, may you be long gone to greener pastures, but may whoever is left to deal with the loss be a person who remembers the goal and bothers to take care of the customers from years past and not a marketdroid 3 buyouts removed who doesn't remember how to spell Penny Arcade.
    EDIT: And if you ever want your kids to play it in the future, we are not going to care about that--we are not trying to protect ourselves against you guys but rather others that would exploit what we have done hence the legalese.

    I appreciate that; by the same token I'm not trying to protect myself against your goal of protecting your ability to make a living with DRM but rather others that would exploit me the customer in the future. Where is the legalese that takes care of that? For example, saying if you go out of business you don't have a problem with me doing what's necessary to keep playing the game I paid to license? Buyout predators and courts care what's written, not what was intended, and we're reaching a point in history where people are getting into court for not much more than letting their kids play a game they paid for.

    I'm not trying to be a dick or anything. I wouldn't bother having the conversation if I didn't think you all were good and reasonable people.

  • FactoidFactoid Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Robert...thank you for always being on top of the forums and giving quick, official responses.

    Vlad...I appreciate that you guys aren't trying to be dicks about the DRM. It's a sad commentary on the state of PC gaming that we even have to bother with such things. It says a great deal about Hothead that you're even willing to interact with customers to the extent that you do.

    My suggestion regarding online activation: The "online" portion isn't that big of a deal honestly. It's a digital download, so obviously if you have it you have at least some access to internet on a limited or even one-time basis.

    The grating part is the "3 installs" portion. So my preference would be that instead of 3 installations, keys are monitored for signs of abuse. Obviously if a key is used 50 times in 20 minutes, that's probably piracy.

    Or maybe you go along the lines of making an activation "reset" after so long. So in 5 years, if I load it 4 times, by the time I've loaded it the 4th time, my first activation has expired and I can use it again.

    I know there's a lot of us complaining, but look on the bright side...we're all talking about how we want to be playing your game 10 years from now...must mean we like it right? I know I do.

  • ElQuackElQuack Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    You may want to look at how the Live for Speed people handle this. You get a set number of installs but they are restored by one each Friday until you get back up to the max number.
    Maybe something like you get one back each month or something like that would be enough to handle most needs while preventing widespread casual asshattery.

    (you will never stop the hardcore pirates, it's just an exercise in frustration to even try. They won't buy anything and you'll be throwing good money after bad.)

  • aunsophaunsoph Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    I've bought the game yesterday morning, hoping to play this on my off days. License Key authentication fails and I get Error 21. From the looks of things, I have doubts I'll be able to enjoy this earlier than the weekend, if not longer, depending on whether or not a hotfix is release standalone or in a new release bundle.

    That by itself is troublesome, yes. Incredibly annoying, yes. But it's also understandable and I can cope with it.

    Now... official word has it that my technical difficulties are related to two separate issues. One of them is most likely linked to localized versions of Windows, seeing as other foreigners are having this same problem. If the second is related to this DRM in any way shape or form, I'll be seeing fucking red. Calling Gabe and Tycho hypocrites would be a tremendous understatement.

    As an aside, the whole "keeping people honest" fallacy is REALLY starting to get on my nerves. COME UP WITH A NEW BUZZ CATCHPHRASE.

  • MaratanosMaratanos Registered User
    edited May 2008
    Emrys wrote: »
    HH Vlad wrote: »
    The system was designed just to keep people honest not be a buzz kill.

    I appreciate the legitimate concern of theft but I don't need to be "kept" honest, thanks. Somewhere producers have to accept that DRM is a choice to distrust and alienate some customers based on belief some other set of their customers are interested in screwing them.

    Well it's obvious you've never actually tried to sell a video game yourself. The sad fact of the matter is that in todays society, a certain amount of so-called "DRM" is inevitable, even attractive. Unfortunately, our gamer society has a tendency to demonize the term without making it clear that the ultimate goal in copy-protection should not be its elimination, but its transparency. We only hate DRM because so many people fail to do this. They use it like a hammer, blunt and forceful, rather than like a watch, subtle and complicated. If DRM doesn't interfere with the legitimate use of the game, but comes down like a ton of bricks on clear cases of piracy, who are you to say that it is wrong? Making this stand on that position, by its very nature, is an advocacy of dishonest use of software.
    Officially, yes, we don't want people to be passing their codes to everyone under the sun and from Hothead's perspective, I think we have a right to try to prevent that but not at the cost at getting in your face.

    It's your property; you have a right to tell me I can't play it unless I eat broken glass as far as I'm concerned. I similarly have a right to accept those terms or not.

    Well this is very curious, isn't it. They have a right to set the license agreement. You have a right to agree or disagree. But because it's not any kind of negotiation, and because, more often than not, you don't even get to read the license agreement until AFTER the purchase, your only choices are to do without the software, or to agree to the terms. And thus the legality of the whole arrangement gets very muddled. In point of fact, if you took a EULA to court, odds are a lot of them would be stricken down as made under duress.

  • lorechaserlorechaser Registered User
    edited May 2008
    Maratanos wrote: »
    Well it's obvious you've never actually tried to sell a video game yourself. The sad fact of the matter is that in todays society, a certain amount of so-called "DRM" is inevitable, even attractive. Unfortunately, our gamer society has a tendency to demonize the term without making it clear that the ultimate goal in copy-protection should not be its elimination, but its transparency. We only hate DRM because so many people fail to do this. They use it like a hammer, blunt and forceful, rather than like a watch, subtle and complicated. If DRM doesn't interfere with the legitimate use of the game, but comes down like a ton of bricks on clear cases of piracy, who are you to say that it is wrong? Making this stand on that position, by its very nature, is an advocacy of dishonest use of software.

    Indeed. Much like those who object to facial recognition scanning are doing so because they are terrorists, and those who object to gun control are killers.

    I find it a bit amusing that a PA game has, functionally, the same DRM scheme that a PA comic mocked and PA rant decried.

    Not that I wouldn't put DRM on my game. But I wouldn't claim people who felt slighted by it were clearly criminals....

  • MaratanosMaratanos Registered User
    edited May 2008
    Indeed. Much like those who object to facial recognition scanning are doing so because they are terrorists, and those who object to gun control are killers.

    *snip*

    Not that I wouldn't put DRM on my game. But I wouldn't claim people who felt slighted by it were clearly criminals....

    Which would be a bold allegation, if only I had made it. But I can see where the confusion arises, because I was speaking of DRM in a largely hypothetical sense. And I do freely admit that under circumstances that I'm going to lay out again, it is logical to conclude that the only ones who take offense at this hypothetical DRM are the ones it is intended to block: the ones who didn't pay for it.


    1. While our society of gamers has a tendency to demonize the term "DRM", it is not, inherently, a detrimental concept. Nobody complains about Steam's DRM. Nobody complains that activations are necessary. Even if they did, on the latter, they would necessarily not understand what's going on, because downloadable titles and activation are completely inseparable. If RSPD did not have activation, all that would be required to play the game is to make the right request to the server and end up with the file for the full game. Instead, by placing activation WITHIN the game's code, it is only bypassable by reverse-engineering.

    2. The reason we tend to demonize DRM is because it goes wrong. We remember things like Starforce, that make the game hard to use, wreck your disk drive and leave your PC a security wasteland. We remember things like the Mass Effect and Spore 10-day internet activation, because we want to play even when we have no web access. We remember SecuROM and the 3-time activation not because it was somehow anathema, but because it didn't work right. The key to successful DRM is transparency and non-intrusiveness. If these could be perfected, DRM itself would no longer need to be loathed in the way it often is.

    3. Which leads me to point 3. The point of contention here. To propose that DRM which is completely transparent, which blocks illigitimate use and not an iota more, should be removed... there is no reason whatsoever that one could make such a stand. If your sole goal is the effective and easy use of your software, such a stand would not make sense. A piece of DRM that does not intrude on legitimate use, logically, only intrudes on illigitimate use. And so, if your sole goal is the effective and easy use of your software, it is logically necessary that we conclude that it is impossible for you to effectively and easily use your software if the DRM is in place. But since we already established that we're talking about hypothetical DRM that only interferes if we're using the software illigitimately, we again must logically conclude that our use is not legitimate.

    I find it a bit amusing that a PA game has, functionally, the same DRM scheme that a PA comic mocked and PA rant decried.

    I cut this out because it didn't really fit. I have very little opinion on this. In all likelyhood, the entire setup was created by Hothead Games as a result of some kind of lapse in communication.

    I am curious though. Which PA comic was this again? I don't remember one recently. I do remember the one about the Mass Effect and Spore activation, but that WASN'T the same system as this. In all likelyhood I'm simply lacking in the requisite memory and I'm being obnoxious for even asking. But I am curious.

  • HH VladHH Vlad Registered User
    edited May 2008
    aunsoph wrote: »
    I've bought the game yesterday morning, hoping to play this on my off days. License Key authentication fails and I get Error 21. From the looks of things, I have doubts I'll be able to enjoy this earlier than the weekend, if not longer, depending on whether or not a hotfix is release standalone or in a new release bundle.

    That by itself is troublesome, yes. Incredibly annoying, yes. But it's also understandable and I can cope with it.

    Now... official word has it that my technical difficulties are related to two separate issues. One of them is most likely linked to localized versions of Windows, seeing as other foreigners are having this same problem. If the second is related to this DRM in any way shape or form, I'll be seeing fucking red.

    Okay, here is the latest:

    1) We will adjust the EULA further especially regarding concurrent use so that it is clear that we are not in fact dicks
    2) Our goal was a system that was lightweight, as transparent as possible and not in your face. We will spend more time and make it better and we are listening. PA and Hothead goals were common 1) unfortunately something is needed, and 2) make it simple and transparent. To be clear, it was Hothead's implementation of the stated goals and there is no reason we can't improve it.
    3) The fix is incoming regarding Error 21. There were two places in code where we did not handle unicode (international characters) for Windows properly. Actually the fix is done and we are testing new builds tomorrow and will have the new version out as fast as we can.

  • aunsophaunsoph Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    HH Vlad wrote: »
    3) The fix is incoming regarding Error 21. There were two places in code where we did not handle unicode (international characters) for Windows properly. Actually the fix is done and we are testing new builds tomorrow and will have the new version out as fast as we can.

    Let me first state that I'm pleased that it was just some unicode shenanigans and not a DRM conflict; I'm rather sensitive about it, as you can see, for I've had my share of problems with them in the past.

    I don't mind the illusion of security the copy-protections provide; while I don't believe it's able to stop even the most casual of gamers intending on playing without paying, I can condone its existence as long as it doesn't interfere with the software's functionality or overstep their boundaries by fiddling with virtual drives, core registries or installing hidden rootkits.

    Since this is not the case with the Penny Arcade game, I retract any complaints.

    Thank you for the update once again, Vlad.

  • RedeboRedebo Registered User
    edited May 2008
    Just the fact that the developers are on here, responding at all assures them a spot in my "Hall of Non-Dicks"

    Fun game BTW.

  • MeizMeiz Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Mother fucking unicode.

    So if I haphazardly encounter this error 21 because I happen to trigger the DRM, what should one do to get in touch with you guys?

  • devoirdevoir Registered User
    edited May 2008
    Wait until the patch rolls out in the near future.

  • ZhirzzhZhirzzh Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Why not do what Stardock does? They have NO DRM, and their games do very well.

    steam_sig.png
  • TankHammerTankHammer Extreme Ghostbuster Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Redebo wrote: »
    Just the fact that the developers are on here, responding at all assures them a spot in my "Hall of Non-Dicks"

    Fun game BTW.

    God I feel so bad for the HotHead guys. On one hand they have immediate access to their target demographic to the point where they are on a practically first-name basis with them and can receive criticism and praise instantly. On the other hand the Penny-Arcade readership can be a very critical and well-educated bunch with very strong opinions on things which they are not shy about sharing.

    I do not feel that HotHead's copy protection of OTRSPOD is in any way abusing their customers and I am very glad that people do not have the ability to pass around one copy of the game to 100 of their closest internet friends to circumvent having to dig out their credit card (or borrow one from someone). It doesn't sound as if HH ever intended for the consumer to be content with three installs forever, but only a limit to three simultaneous installs. Hell, that seems pretty generous to me even. It's better than I get from Adobe anyway. I don't know a single person who owns more than 3 personal computers, and even then I can't imagine someone wanting to install a copy of this game (which I completed in a very leisurely pace and ended up beating it in 10 hours) on 3 separate machines.
    It isn't as if there were a deathmatch or other multi-player option (...yet! :winky:). It's a single-player adventure/rpg!

    This project is and has been under such obviously good hands that I think trying to scandalize Penny-Arcade and this game is a bit unnecessary.

    That said I am very glad to see how quickly both Khoo and Vlad jumped on this issue to put people's minds at rest.

    4icmw.jpg TankHammer | 2zivq6q.jpg
  • devoirdevoir Registered User
    edited May 2008
    Zhirzzh wrote: »
    Why not do what Stardock does? They have NO DRM, and their games do very well.

    Their DRM is essentially the same as Stardock's from memory. You still need a code to install the game.

  • ZhirzzhZhirzzh Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Stardock doesn't have limited activations. Not only that, the CD keys work for all copys of the game, and don't need online activation.

    steam_sig.png
  • taliosfalcontaliosfalcon Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    devoir wrote: »
    Zhirzzh wrote: »
    Why not do what Stardock does? They have NO DRM, and their games do very well.

    Their DRM is essentially the same as Stardock's from memory. You still need a code to install the game.
    If I recall correctly (which i'm about 60% certain I do D:) While stardock games have a cd key option during install, its optional, you don't need to enter it. You just need to enter it later on if you try to patch the game.

    WII U NNID- talios
    steam-taliosfalcon
    XBL-AdeptPenguin
  • 143999143999 Duly appointed editor of the Tyrest AccordRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    HH Vlad wrote: »
    First, we designed it to allow you to take it to multiple computers or even switch to a different OS. As well, if you need more installs because you hit the initial limit, just ask. We are not going to be dicks. And if we ever go out of business, we will make sure you are taken care of regarding playing the game long into the future.

    I've always been curious as to how this would happen in the case of companies forthright and honest enough about extremely long-term planning to actually plan for this. Is this the kind of thing for which you would write the code before the game's release then keep on-hand while waiting for that far-flung day?

    4Bpocis.png
  • ZhirzzhZhirzzh Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    That IS right, but I'd say they WOULD want one if the game wasn't going to be patched again and again. As OtPoD will likely only get one or two bugfixes, I could see needing the cd-key.

    steam_sig.png
  • hotsaucehotsauce Registered User
    edited May 2008
    I don't buy anything with Digital Wrongs Management. Period. I refuse to be treated as though I'm guilty until I prove myself innocent. I won't support a developer spending money (a cost that is passed along to me) on something that has nothing to do with gameplay, doesn't perform its intended function (google 'rain slick precipice crack' to see what I mean), and prevents me from exercising my rights as a consumer. I woke up this morning planning to buy this game, but now I won't be. I have three computers near me right now; one connected to the HDTV, on which I do most of my gaming, one in the office, on which I play games when someone else is watching the TV, and a laptop I use to play games while traveling. Heaven forbid I upgrade one of these machines; if I do, I'll have to contact Hothead to ask permission to use my property, and if it's the laptop and I'm on the road without an internet connection, I guess I'm just screwed.

    I think this sums it up nicely:
    ...copy protection barely deters piracy, and makes life more difficult specifically for paying customers. ... It's the sort of thing that makes a person invest their leisure time with other machines, or - and this is awesome - pirate games they have themselves purchased by circumventing the check with a cracked exe. This is something I do almost one hundred percent of the time

    Sorry guys. I really wanted to give you my money, but it looks like it won't be happening. If everyone who said the same on one message board I visit was being honest, at least twenty sales have been lost because of this. That's what, $400 your anti-piracy measure has cost you, and judging by the results of the aforementioned google search, it looks like it has gained you $0 in prevented acts of piracy.

  • devoirdevoir Registered User
    edited May 2008
    Zhirzzh wrote: »
    Stardock doesn't have limited activations. Not only that, the CD keys work for all copys of the game, and don't need online activation.

    I could have sworn that they keep an eye on the activations and have a way of locking out a code from being authenticated if it gets abused (the example they gave was more than 5 activations in any given day), which means that you need to use an online activation.

    In any case, the limited activations doesn't mean you can't get more.

    I don't know what you mean about all copies; Rain Slick allows you to use the same key for Windows, Linux and Mac.

  • devoirdevoir Registered User
    edited May 2008
    hotsauce wrote: »
    Sorry guys. I really wanted to give you my money, but it looks like it won't be happening. If everyone who said the same on one message board I visit was being honest, at least twenty sales have been lost because of this. That's what, $400 your anti-piracy measure has cost you, and judging by the results of the aforementioned google search, it looks like it has gained you $0 in prevented acts of piracy.

    I don't know, you sound awfully smug and happy about it. Have you even looked at what the anti-piracy measures are and how unobtrusive they are?

  • hotsaucehotsauce Registered User
    edited May 2008
    devoir wrote: »
    I don't know, you sound awfully smug and happy about it.
    Perhaps that's because tone of voice doesn't carry well in this medium. I was really looking forward to playing this game.
    Have you even looked at what the anti-piracy measures are and how unobtrusive they are?
    Yes, but I don't actually care. I don't support DRM. Period.

  • ZhirzzhZhirzzh Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    devoir wrote: »
    Zhirzzh wrote: »
    Stardock doesn't have limited activations. Not only that, the CD keys work for all copys of the game, and don't need online activation.

    I could have sworn that they keep an eye on the activations and have a way of locking out a code from being authenticated if it gets abused (the example they gave was more than 5 activations in any given day), which means that you need to use an online activation.

    In any case, the limited activations doesn't mean you can't get more.

    I don't know what you mean about all copies; Rain Slick allows you to use the same key for Windows, Linux and Mac.

    As the man after me said, the key only really allows you to download patches, but you can have the game on as many systems as you want, and it can be installed without internet access (burn patches to disc).

    steam_sig.png
  • samprasfansamprasfan Registered User
    edited May 2008
    hotsauce wrote: »
    devoir wrote: »
    I don't know, you sound awfully smug and happy about it.
    Perhaps that's because tone of voice doesn't carry well in this medium. I was really looking forward to playing this game.
    Have you even looked at what the anti-piracy measures are and how unobtrusive they are?
    Yes, but I don't actually care. I don't support DRM. Period.

    That's an interesting position, and I don't have a problem with it. However, I'd wager 99% of all for-profit software companies put some sort of DRM on everything they release. Unless everything you use is 100% open-source, including your OSes on all 3 of your computers, you've got software with DRM implemented in it.

    You can be a gamer and vehemently disagree with the use of DRM in any form. Refusing to buy software with it implies you're not a gamer at all, and therefore not a potential customer anyway.

  • cliffskicliffski Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Emrys wrote: »

    I appreciate the legitimate concern of theft but I don't need to be "kept" honest, thanks.


    Ever run a business that deals with customers? of COURSE customers need to be kept honest. Why do you think you cant just leave the right money on the counter and ignore the queue in a store? why do they have security tags on clothes, CCTV and security guards?
    Its to keep you honest, because annoying though it is, there ARE a lot of dishonest people out there, and if you don't do something about that, you go out of business.

  • WillethWilleth Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    hotsauce:

    Refusing to meet anyone half-way on this is ridiculous. You're acting as if piracy is not an issue and doesn't need to be fought, and calling it Digital Wrongs Management is about as clever as calling Microsoft 'M$.'

    Stop being such a cockbite and maybe we could have a reasonable discussion on this. You have the developers on this very board bending over backwards to say 'hey, have as many licences as you want as long as you're not a knob about it, that's fine' and you're acting as if that's unacceptable. I don't think you understand your own argument.

    @vgreminders - Don't miss out on timed events in gaming!
    @gamefacts - Totally and utterly true gaming facts on the regular!
  • cliffskicliffski Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    hotsauce wrote: »
    I don't buy anything with Digital Wrongs Management. Period. I refuse to be treated as though I'm guilty until I prove myself innocent.

    do you ever buy clothes from stores that put security tags on them? Surely that's treating you like an evil criminal right?

    I have securom on my PC from a Bioshock install. I only know this because I spotted a key in the registry. It's harmless.
    That games awesome by the way, but I guess you will never know.

  • NotASenatorNotASenator Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    hotsauce wrote: »
    devoir wrote: »
    I don't know, you sound awfully smug and happy about it.
    Perhaps that's because tone of voice doesn't carry well in this medium. I was really looking forward to playing this game.
    Have you even looked at what the anti-piracy measures are and how unobtrusive they are?
    Yes, but I don't actually care. I don't support DRM. Period.

    Wow, sucks to be you.

    I can't really bring myself to find any sympathy for you. It's like, you're here to tell the developers how they've wronged you, but really all you're saying is that you are purposely preventing yourself from playing the game and it's very very sad. Abloo abloo abloo.

  • GersenGersen Registered User
    edited May 2008
    Willeth wrote: »
    hotsauce:
    Refusing to meet anyone half-way on this is ridiculous. You're acting as if piracy is not an issue and doesn't need to be fought,

    The problem is not whenever piracy need to be fought but whenever the solution chosed to fight it is usefull or not, and it's definetly not, if DRM were really efficient against piracy you wouldn't have the record industry starting to remove them.
    cliffski wrote: »
    do you ever buy clothes from stores that put security tags on them? Surely that's treating you like an evil criminal right?

    Sorry to say that but that's a pretty stupid comparaison, when you buy clothes the security tag is removed when you leave the shop, you don't have a system that, everytime you want to wear your clothes, force you to contact the shop to ask for their permission, and finally if the shop goes bankrupt you don't have to hope for them to release an hypotetical "patch" to allows you to still wear you clothes

    The big problem with DRM is that they are solely one sided, the excuse is that they are here to keep the consumer honest (translation: prevent the consumer from reselling or giving the game to somebody else when he no longer play it) but there is absolutely nothing keeping the editor/rights owners to remain honest.

    It's nice of us to tell them that the activation are, for now, unlimited, and saying that in case they are no longer there they will release a patch to remove the DRM, etc... but, even if they means it, in the end it's nothing but thin air.

    Nothing prevent them from changing their mind anytime they want, if tomorow or in one year they decide that it's maximum one activation per consumer they can, and thanks to the EULA you accepted there is absolutely nothing you can do to prevent it. Same goes for the "we will release a patch if the activation server goes down" they have no obligation to do so and worse, they have no idea that will happen when/if they goes under, they might be bought by another company that decide that if you want to continue playing the game you have to rebuy it using their online distribution service, or there might be all sort of legal troubles preventing them from releassing the DRM removal patch.

    It's kind of sad that most peoples are so short sighted when it comes to DRM, just because a DRM doesn't bother you TODAY doesn't means that it wont sometime down the road, and if it does there is nothing you can legaly do about it...you accepted the EULA.

  • WillethWilleth Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Gersen wrote: »
    Nothing prevent them from changing their mind anytime they want, if tomorow or in one year they decide that it's maximum one activation per consumer they can, and thanks to the EULA you accepted there is absolutely nothing you can do to prevent it. Same goes for the "we will release a patch if the activation server goes down" they have no obligation to do so and worse, they have no idea that will happen when/if they goes under, they might be bought by another company that decide that if you want to continue playing the game you have to rebuy it using their online distribution service, or there might be all sort of legal troubles preventing them from releassing the DRM removal patch.

    You're treating Hothead as guilty until proven innocent, here. They've said that they'll support your rights as much as possible, have done the best they can to make it an open system, and you're still dubious and are accusing them of wanting to rip you off.

    Yes, I agree that DRM is a horrible snake of a thing, poisonous and vile in almost every case. But here, the terms they have laid out are considerably looser and more pro-consumer.

    EDIT: On re-reading your post it seems like that actually wasn't what you were driving at. More that if you have these restrictive systems in place, and then something happens with the company, you're suddenly locked out of something you have purchased through no fault of your own. Correct?

    @vgreminders - Don't miss out on timed events in gaming!
    @gamefacts - Totally and utterly true gaming facts on the regular!
  • FactoidFactoid Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Consider this rabble-rouser placated. Kudos to PA and Hothead for their responsiveness and hard work. DRM is a touchy issue and it's only been getting worse lately. I probably suffer from an over-developed sense of indignation.

    I want to clarify that I never really had a problem with the online activation, though I'm not sure that came across. It's a sore point, to be sure, but really what I hated was the idea of limited installs. Now that I know hothead is committed to the "don't be a dick" policy, and is even going so far as to re-structure the EULA, I'm happy to be a paying customer again.

    As always I reserve the right for further indignation upon reading EULA v.2

    Thanks guys, and keep up the tremendous work!

  • mntorankusumntorankusu Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    cliffski wrote: »
    do you ever buy clothes from stores that put security tags on them? Surely that's treating you like an evil criminal right?

    DRM is not a security tag, though. Security tags are removed from the product at the time of purchase and you don't have to bother with them ever again. DRM of this sort is essentially an illegal-to-remove security tag that is placed on the product at the time of purchase. As a result, people who actually buy the product have to deal with it forever, and the ones who steal the product or break the law to remove the tag are never bothered. That would be a pretty lame tag.

    I'm not the kind of person who would boycott a game because of a DRM scheme as tame as this one, but I do think it's stupid that it's there at all.

  • GrathGrath Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2008
    hotsauce wrote: »
    devoir wrote: »
    I don't know, you sound awfully smug and happy about it.
    Perhaps that's because tone of voice doesn't carry well in this medium. I was really looking forward to playing this game.
    Have you even looked at what the anti-piracy measures are and how unobtrusive they are?
    Yes, but I don't actually care. I don't support DRM. Period.

    you probably don't actually buy anything, your parents probably give you the money.

    Really some people need to grow up.

    3ds Code 0619-3710-2995
  • BassguyBassguy Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    I'm not the kind of person who would boycott a game because of a DRM scheme as tame as this one, but I do think it's stupid that it's there at all.
    That is exactly how I feel.

    The argument for DRM is that it "Keeps people honest." Too bad that it doesn't accomplish that at all. All it does is hinder the honest people that gave you money in the first place. There are no ifs, ands, or buts about pirating. If someone wants to steal your content, they will. No matter how draconian your DRM, it will eventually get cracked.

    On the other hand, I live in a world filled with DRM. I'm incredibly weak-willed, so I have yet to get up on my high horse, and boycott DRMed products. I buy music, I buy software, and I buy DVDs. Most of those have DRM, and it drives me bonkers. I have bought and paid for everything on my computer, and I don't like being treated like a common thief.

    TLDR: I don't like DRM as a concept, but I live with it because I crave content.

  • Captain ElevenCaptain Eleven The last card is a kronk Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    You guys bitching about the DRM are really, really funny. This is a pretty non-restrictive method of DRM, and they're addressing a couple of issue that have come up. Expecting anyone to release a game with no form of DRM is just a tad unreasonable. Get over it.

    steam_sig.png
  • ASimPersonASimPerson And they will tremble again at the sound of our silence!Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    You guys bitching about the DRM are really, really funny. This is a pretty non-restrictive method of DRM, and they're addressing a couple of issue that have come up. Expecting anyone to release a game with no form of DRM is just a tad unreasonable. Get over it.

    http://www.stardock.com/ ?

    redoctober2.png
    SE++ Forum Battle Archive | PST = Pacific Standard Time | DRUNKSTUCK: A Homestuck recap
  • Captain ElevenCaptain Eleven The last card is a kronk Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    ASimPerson wrote: »
    You guys bitching about the DRM are really, really funny. This is a pretty non-restrictive method of DRM, and they're addressing a couple of issue that have come up. Expecting anyone to release a game with no form of DRM is just a tad unreasonable. Get over it.

    http://www.stardock.com/ ?

    Have fun playing games made only by Stardock then.

    Edit: My point is that some people make a business decision to not have DRM, and some do. For those who don't use DRM, good on them. For those who choose to use reasonble DRM, they are trying to protect their work, which is totally within their right. And it's not like Hothead is using Starforce or anything.

    Aw crap, I disagree with the guy with a Sean Connery avatar.

    I lose.

    steam_sig.png
  • glycerineglycerine Registered User
    edited May 2008
    Re: One-time (per install) activation not being the same as in-store security tags - it's worth noting that stores can be more leniant in this regard because they have a far stronger ally in their fight against copying; the laws of physics (or at least, what it's easy for us to do with them at the moment). When you take this into account, the implementations become far more similar.

    For what it's worth, i'm against overkill-DRM enough that i do semi-regularly decide not to buy games/other software because of it (the rest of the time the software that implements that kind of stuff doesn't interest me enough to want to buy it in the first place). I thought the DRM in this case was perfectly reasonable; people have a right to protect their revenue (whether that's lost through theft, copying, or any other manner) - doing it in an open and honest manner should be encouraged, not shouted down.

    That's not to say systems can't be improved further of course, which seems to be happening - again, good...not bad :)

«1345678
Sign In or Register to comment.