Zxerolfor the smaller pieces, my shovel wouldn't doso i took off my boot and used my shoeRegistered Userregular
edited September 2007
Yep, it's confirmed. Trying to execute the game with a new account will trip SecuROM and you're forced to re-activate the game. On the same computer, mind you.
Not really a PC gamer but aren't they basically saying - " Hey guys instead of taking the game and sharing it with 40 bajillion friends were' going to limit you so we can make a profit. Cause you know that's how we make sequels and such"
PC games have, for years, had the same protection console games have, i.e. you need the disc in the drive to play it, and you ain't got but one disc (and copying this disc in a way that the game recognizes as legitimate is very difficult). On PCs, this has been rather easy to get around since the only thing on the disc that the program actually needs is, well, the copy protection data, as opposed to, say, my Wii, where the whole game is loading from the disc.
Bioshock incorporates a new, improved copy protection scheme where, in addition to the usual crap above, you're only allowed to install the game on two (was later increased to five) computers. You can still only run it on one computer at a time because of the usual disc requirement. Consider the frequency that the average PC gamer upgrades or replaces his computer and you see the problem this presents.
Now, it's surfaced that separate Windows accounts on the same computer count as separate computers for the purpose of that license. This is, well, not good, especially since if you just steal the whole goddamn game off the Internet in the first place you don't have any such restrictions. This is called a "BTO vulnerability" in the DRM industry: where the pirated copy is Better Than the Original. This is why, for instance, the practice of having PC gamers look up the word on line n of page k of the manual fell out of style: pirated games didn't piss off the user in (ironically) an attempt to keep him from pirating the game. It seems that the industry as a whole is going to have to re-learn this lesson, as they re-learned it previously when they all wanted to use the (easily bypassable) Starforce and paying customers didn't want to give their computers cyber-AIDS.
You said it so much better than I ever could, thank you.
i'd suggest you buy it on the 360 but i bet some of you will go "NUH UH I REFUSE TO SUPPORT MICROSOFT'S BUSINESS TACTICS" and then i'll have to call you dumb again and oh man it is such a vicious cycle
edit: lol apo
I don't refuse to support M$, I just don't want to buy a broken product, so I don't own a 360.
I bet you pay for Guitar Hero I song packs and encourage these companies to screw us over so bad. I'm not trying to be righteous, I'm just trying not to get screwed.
doesn't seem broken to me. It even plays games!
and no, i don't own guitar hero. and you know what? it's a video game. nobody is forcing you to buy anything. "Screwed" is a very subjective term, and you in essence screw yourself when you decide to buy whatever "overpriced" download packs you buy.
I buy things because they are fun. I'd rather not give it so much thought that I turn into an uptight crusader against capitalism. I simply don't care.
Does this shit apply if you have the steam version?
Also, do they eventually patch that shit off? I would hate to pick up the game ten years from now and not be able to play due to the system no longer being in place.
and i mean holy fuck, 2k has been doing nothing but listening and trying to please their consumers. they will fix this. but of course you have to cry wolf even after they've said they would.
i'd suggest you buy it on the 360 but i bet some of you will go "NUH UH I REFUSE TO SUPPORT MICROSOFT'S BUSINESS TACTICS" and then i'll have to call you dumb again and oh man it is such a vicious cycle
edit: lol apo
I don't refuse to support M$, I just don't want to buy a broken product, so I don't own a 360.
I bet you pay for Guitar Hero I song packs and encourage these companies to screw us over so bad. I'm not trying to be righteous, I'm just trying not to get screwed.
broken as in the RRoD?
you are aware that the new heatsinks have been in the system for almost 2 months now yes?
I am aware, and waiting to see how they perform. I have plenty to keep me busy in the meantime.
that's a shame, i must've stroked off after opening the box, and imagined i completed it.
Does this shit apply if you have the steam version?
I would also like to know this. I don't have it yet as I spent most of this month's video game budget on Metroid Prime 3, but I was planning on getting this game eventually, and it would suck if I, for stupid copy-protection reasons, needed to get a 360 first. I mean, I was planning to get it on Steam anyway, so this would be good to know.
I still don't really understand the logic. People have been lending games since there were games to lend. The whole "well a PC game isn't like a console game, since it's installed onto the system" thing doesn't cut it anymore. Most games need the DVD in the tray to play, including Bioshock. So it really is like consoles again. You can't compare it to piracy, since the guy borrowing the game is eventually going to have to give it back. (Unless he's one of those people. :x )
I'm not going to stand against it, since that'll do nothing but deny me a great game, but it's a pretty dumb way to conduct business. You're essentially denying yourself free marketing.
The only way to do anything about it is for everyone to go to where they bought it from and return the game, as I have said, they are in void of their license agreement. It is perfectly acceptable for you to return the game for your money back - at any time.
i'd suggest you buy it on the 360 but i bet some of you will go "NUH UH I REFUSE TO SUPPORT MICROSOFT'S BUSINESS TACTICS" and then i'll have to call you dumb again and oh man it is such a vicious cycle
edit: lol apo
I don't refuse to support M$, I just don't want to buy a broken product, so I don't own a 360.
I bet you pay for Guitar Hero I song packs and encourage these companies to screw us over so bad. I'm not trying to be righteous, I'm just trying not to get screwed.
doesn't seem broken to me. It even plays games!
and no, i don't own guitar hero. and you know what? it's a video game. nobody is forcing you to buy anything. "Screwed" is a very subjective term, and you in essence screw yourself when you decide to buy whatever "overpriced" download packs you buy.
I buy things because they are fun. I'd rather not give it so much thought that I turn into an uptight crusader against capitalism. I simply don't care.
Color me red and call me Ivan then.
I'm glad you don't buy overpriced download packs. I know I'm missing out on this game, and also other 360 goodness, but I only have time to play but so many games, and I'm full up on stuff to play right now. It is possible I'll get one before the holidays.
This is just one of those games I prefer to play on a PC though. I'm not a big FPS console fan.
If this problem can be solved by getting it through Steam, then I may do that. Steam is a good example of how to protect your games and not totally screw over your consumer.
I still don't really understand the logic. People have been lending games since there were games to lend. The whole "well a PC game isn't like a console game, since it's installed onto the system" thing doesn't cut it anymore. Most games need the DVD in the tray to play, including Bioshock. So it really is like consoles again. You can't compare it to piracy, since the guy borrowing the game is eventually going to have to give it back. (Unless he's one of those people. :x )
I'm not going to stand against it, since that'll do nothing but deny me a great game, but it's a pretty dumb way to conduct business. You're essentially denying yourself free marketing.
They're just seeing how much they can get away with, that's all, and it'll take a bunch of gamers openly complaining in order to have them stop. It was the same way with Starforce.
I still don't really understand the logic. People have been lending games since there were games to lend. The whole "well a PC game isn't like a console game, since it's installed onto the system" thing doesn't cut it anymore. Most games need the DVD in the tray to play, including Bioshock. So it really is like consoles again. You can't compare it to piracy, since the guy borrowing the game is eventually going to have to give it back. (Unless he's one of those people. :x )
I'm not going to stand against it, since that'll do nothing but deny me a great game, but it's a pretty dumb way to conduct business. You're essentially denying yourself free marketing.
They're just seeing how much they can get away with, that's all, and it'll take a bunch of gamers openly complaining in order to have them stop. It was the same way with Starforce.
I still don't really understand the logic. People have been lending games since there were games to lend. The whole "well a PC game isn't like a console game, since it's installed onto the system" thing doesn't cut it anymore. Most games need the DVD in the tray to play, including Bioshock. So it really is like consoles again. You can't compare it to piracy, since the guy borrowing the game is eventually going to have to give it back. (Unless he's one of those people. :x )
I'm not going to stand against it, since that'll do nothing but deny me a great game, but it's a pretty dumb way to conduct business. You're essentially denying yourself free marketing.
what? no. free marketing is a demo. You want to try the game? Play the demo. You want to get your own experience? buy the game. The "olol but people were doing it" argument doesn't work for anything ever.
I still don't really understand the logic. People have been lending games since there were games to lend. The whole "well a PC game isn't like a console game, since it's installed onto the system" thing doesn't cut it anymore. Most games need the DVD in the tray to play, including Bioshock. So it really is like consoles again. You can't compare it to piracy, since the guy borrowing the game is eventually going to have to give it back. (Unless he's one of those people. :x )
I'm not going to stand against it, since that'll do nothing but deny me a great game, but it's a pretty dumb way to conduct business. You're essentially denying yourself free marketing.
what? no. free marketing is a demo. You want to try the game? Play the demo. You want to get your own experience? buy the game. The "olol but people were doing it" argument doesn't work for anything ever.
Except that it does. People have been lending console games for all time, and the most popular of those still sell more than PC games by a landslide. I'm not even talking about morality, this is sheer business. You can't just write off what people do and have done in the past when it comes to selling a product, that is one of the key factors of marketing. And this, from a marketing standpoint, doesn't make much sense.
I still don't really understand the logic. People have been lending games since there were games to lend. The whole "well a PC game isn't like a console game, since it's installed onto the system" thing doesn't cut it anymore. Most games need the DVD in the tray to play, including Bioshock. So it really is like consoles again. You can't compare it to piracy, since the guy borrowing the game is eventually going to have to give it back. (Unless he's one of those people. :x )
I'm not going to stand against it, since that'll do nothing but deny me a great game, but it's a pretty dumb way to conduct business. You're essentially denying yourself free marketing.
what? no. free marketing is a demo. You want to try the game? Play the demo. You want to get your own experience? buy the game. The "olol but people were doing it" argument doesn't work for anything ever.
So I say again. I guess I'm a bad man because I borrowed my friend's 360 copy, right?
What about people who rented the game? They didn't buy the game, but they still got the same experience. Are they bad people too?
The Wolfman on
"The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
You guys know that I don't have to follow the "proper" practices to argue for them. I've borrowed games as well. But from the standpoint of greater profit and good for the company, it is NOT ideal. You may think it's a big factor, but it's very much anecdotal evidence.
I still don't really understand the logic. People have been lending games since there were games to lend. The whole "well a PC game isn't like a console game, since it's installed onto the system" thing doesn't cut it anymore. Most games need the DVD in the tray to play, including Bioshock. So it really is like consoles again. You can't compare it to piracy, since the guy borrowing the game is eventually going to have to give it back. (Unless he's one of those people. :x )
I'm not going to stand against it, since that'll do nothing but deny me a great game, but it's a pretty dumb way to conduct business. You're essentially denying yourself free marketing.
what? no. free marketing is a demo. You want to try the game? Play the demo. You want to get your own experience? buy the game. The "olol but people were doing it" argument doesn't work for anything ever.
So I say again. I guess I'm a bad man because I borrowed my friend's 360 copy, right?
What about people who rented the game? They didn't buy the game, but they still got the same experience. Are they bad people too?
Renting is a little different as that company paid for the rights to rent it. However, you borrowing your friends 360 version makes you a bad person.
Everytime you share your 360 game, 2k games shoots a baby in the face.
You guys know that I don't have to follow the "proper" practices to argue for them. I've borrowed games as well. But from the standpoint of greater profit and good for the company, it is NOT ideal. You may think it's a big factor, but it's very much anecdotal evidence.
And this is a good point. But the problem is the other side of the argument isn't anymore effective. There just isn't any way to prove that keeping games free of this sort of thing will make them sell better or worse. In the end it might be totally irrelevant, unless we're talking about something absurd like Starforce. I don't honestly know why I brought it up in the first place, since this sort of argument always loops around retardedly.
Although, not as retarded as if this became a moral argument.
Cilla Black on
0
Options
Zxerolfor the smaller pieces, my shovel wouldn't doso i took off my boot and used my shoeRegistered Userregular
edited September 2007
I should totally install a toilet for every single member of my family, now. You think I'm being sarcastic, but it just hit me that I don't want to share ass-seats with the nasty butts of every single member of my family. That's disgusting.
That facetious stupidity aside, I take it that the comment from that one rep isn't indicative of overall 2K policy, and it's just one dumbass spewing out personal opinion and Kokatu making a big deal out of it. Although, really, it's still kind of stupid. I enjoyed Bioshock despite the problems with the PC version, and the 360 d00ders got a way better deal out of the offering. I have a friend that still cannot play it because it would hardcrash everytime he pulled up a vending machine or anything else with a menu.
You guys know that I don't have to follow the "proper" practices to argue for them. I've borrowed games as well. But from the standpoint of greater profit and good for the company, it is NOT ideal. You may think it's a big factor, but it's very much anecdotal evidence.
Borrowing and/or renting games, books, movies, etc. falls under fair use (see: first sale doctrine). Yes, it's not ideal for the company. Ideally, the company would get your entire disposable income, transferred straight from your bank account, every time you started the game. It's not about what's most ideal for "greatest profit for the company", it's about striking a balance between what's best for the company and what's best for the customer.
There is nothing wrong with borrowing, renting, or reselling something you bought. It's legal with this and every other type of property.
You guys know that I don't have to follow the "proper" practices to argue for them. I've borrowed games as well. But from the standpoint of greater profit and good for the company, it is NOT ideal. You may think it's a big factor, but it's very much anecdotal evidence.
And this is a good point. But the problem is the other side of the argument isn't anymore effective. There just isn't any way to prove that keeping games free of this sort of thing will make them sell better or worse. In the end it might be totally irrelevant, unless we're talking about something absurd like Starforce. I don't honestly know why I brought it up in the first place, since this sort of argument always loops around retardedly.
Although, not as retarded as if this became a moral argument.
my bottom line on the issue is this: the multiple-account thing needs to be fixed. needs to be unlimited per computer. but the install limit should stay because are you seriously going to install it on five computers?
I just thought I'd throw in my experience thus far with installing Bioshock.
Day it was released, my brother ran out and bought a copy. Installed it on his PC that night (activation #1), and his hard drive promptly failed after starting the game (we'd kinda known it was gonna go at any time). Sucks for him, but we just kinda shrugged our shoulders and installed it on my PC (activation #2). No problems there. When my brother's new hard drive that he ordered comes in, he'll be re-installing it on his computer (activation #3).
If you really think that 5 activations within the lifetime of the product (which should theoretically be forever) is enough, you are out of your mind. This game hasn't even touched the hands of any of my friends, and we're already at 3 out of 5 activations. If this game is *that* good, why wouldn't I install it again further down the road when we finally get around to installing Vista (4th activation)? And that's if some piece of hardware doesn't explode before then (5th activation).
You guys know that I don't have to follow the "proper" practices to argue for them. I've borrowed games as well. But from the standpoint of greater profit and good for the company, it is NOT ideal. You may think it's a big factor, but it's very much anecdotal evidence.
And this is a good point. But the problem is the other side of the argument isn't anymore effective. There just isn't any way to prove that keeping games free of this sort of thing will make them sell better or worse. In the end it might be totally irrelevant, unless we're talking about something absurd like Starforce. I don't honestly know why I brought it up in the first place, since this sort of argument always loops around retardedly.
Although, not as retarded as if this became a moral argument.
my bottom line on the issue is this: the multiple-account thing needs to be fixed. needs to be unlimited per computer. but the install limit should stay because are you seriously going to install it on five computers?
You guys know that I don't have to follow the "proper" practices to argue for them. I've borrowed games as well. But from the standpoint of greater profit and good for the company, it is NOT ideal. You may think it's a big factor, but it's very much anecdotal evidence.
And this is a good point. But the problem is the other side of the argument isn't anymore effective. There just isn't any way to prove that keeping games free of this sort of thing will make them sell better or worse. In the end it might be totally irrelevant, unless we're talking about something absurd like Starforce. I don't honestly know why I brought it up in the first place, since this sort of argument always loops around retardedly.
Although, not as retarded as if this became a moral argument.
my bottom line on the issue is this: the multiple-account thing needs to be fixed. needs to be unlimited per computer. but the install limit should stay because are you seriously going to install it on five computers?
How many times do you upgrade your computer. Are you going to want to play Bioshock five or six years from now, after upgrading your computer several times?
They are putting an expiration date on your property for no reason other than that they can. I'm not paying fifty dollars for that shit.
You guys know that I don't have to follow the "proper" practices to argue for them. I've borrowed games as well. But from the standpoint of greater profit and good for the company, it is NOT ideal. You may think it's a big factor, but it's very much anecdotal evidence.
And this is a good point. But the problem is the other side of the argument isn't anymore effective. There just isn't any way to prove that keeping games free of this sort of thing will make them sell better or worse. In the end it might be totally irrelevant, unless we're talking about something absurd like Starforce. I don't honestly know why I brought it up in the first place, since this sort of argument always loops around retardedly.
Although, not as retarded as if this became a moral argument.
my bottom line on the issue is this: the multiple-account thing needs to be fixed. needs to be unlimited per computer. but the install limit should stay because are you seriously going to install it on five computers?
Well, maybe not 5 separate computers. However if your hard drive dies on you or you need to reformat for whatever reason now. Poof, there goes 1 installation activation right there.
The fact that the same computer requires multiple installation activations is just absurd.
when they accounced the protection system some dude on here was all, WHAT BUT I HAVE TO INSTALL IT ON MY DESKTOP AND ON MY DOWNSTAIRS COMPUTER AND ON MY MACBOOK AND MY OTHER LAPTOP BECAUSE WHEN I COME HOME WHAT IF I WANT TO PLOP DOWN OR NOT GO UPSTAIRS THIS IS SO UNFAIR 2K ARE NAZIS
You guys know that I don't have to follow the "proper" practices to argue for them. I've borrowed games as well. But from the standpoint of greater profit and good for the company, it is NOT ideal. You may think it's a big factor, but it's very much anecdotal evidence.
And this is a good point. But the problem is the other side of the argument isn't anymore effective. There just isn't any way to prove that keeping games free of this sort of thing will make them sell better or worse. In the end it might be totally irrelevant, unless we're talking about something absurd like Starforce. I don't honestly know why I brought it up in the first place, since this sort of argument always loops around retardedly.
Although, not as retarded as if this became a moral argument.
my bottom line on the issue is this: the multiple-account thing needs to be fixed. needs to be unlimited per computer. but the install limit should stay because are you seriously going to install it on five computers?
when they accounced the protection system some dude on here was all, WHAT BUT I HAVE TO INSTALL IT ON MY DESKTOP AND ON MY DOWNSTAIRS COMPUTER AND ON MY MACBOOK AND MY OTHER LAPTOP BECAUSE WHEN I COME HOME WHAT IF I WANT TO PLOP DOWN OR NOT GO UPSTAIRS THIS IS SO UNFAIR 2K ARE NAZIS
And the other side is all WHEN YOU LEND GAMES TO OTHER PEOPLE YOU'RE CHEATING THE DEVS OUT OF MONEY! IT'S UNLEGAL OR SOMETHING! IF YOU LEND YOUR CAR TO YOUR FRIEND FOR THE DAY YOU'RE CHEATING FORD OUT OF MONEY!
and guess what, i'm sure if you call 2k when that happens, they will help you resolve your issue if you won't act like a dickwad! hooray!
I don't need to, I have the console version. Just saying, there are games that are good enough to play over and over again for a really, really long time.
when they accounced the protection system some dude on here was all, WHAT BUT I HAVE TO INSTALL IT ON MY DESKTOP AND ON MY DOWNSTAIRS COMPUTER AND ON MY MACBOOK AND MY OTHER LAPTOP BECAUSE WHEN I COME HOME WHAT IF I WANT TO PLOP DOWN OR NOT GO UPSTAIRS THIS IS SO UNFAIR 2K ARE NAZIS
And the other side is all WHEN YOU LEND GAMES TO OTHER PEOPLE YOU'RE CHEATING THE DEVS OUT OF MONEY! IT'S UNLEGAL OR SOMETHING! IF YOU LEND YOUR CAR TO YOUR FRIEND FOR THE DAY YOU'RE CHEATING FORD OUT OF MONEY!
See, I can use all caps too.
i'm barely exaggerating
he actually stated that he will install it on his macbook because he might be too lazy to go upstairs
it's more akin to wishing your car could be in several places at once
Faricazy on
0
Options
Zxerolfor the smaller pieces, my shovel wouldn't doso i took off my boot and used my shoeRegistered Userregular
and guess what, i'm sure if you call 2k when that happens, they will help you resolve your issue if you won't act like a dickwad! hooray!
There was also this issue though. When the game was released, and people had problems regarding SecuROM, they were told by 2K to contact the SecuROM people. When calling SecuROM, they were directed back to 2K. Not to mention that the original number on the 2K support in the literature was completely wrong.
I'm sure they fixed those issues by now, but still. This is a goddamn $50 game. It's not some operating system or productivity suite costing hundreds or thousands of dollars. Going through these hoops just because you feel today that you suddenly want to play Bioshock or whatever is pretty lame, I think.
Posts
You said it so much better than I ever could, thank you.
and no, i don't own guitar hero. and you know what? it's a video game. nobody is forcing you to buy anything. "Screwed" is a very subjective term, and you in essence screw yourself when you decide to buy whatever "overpriced" download packs you buy.
I buy things because they are fun. I'd rather not give it so much thought that I turn into an uptight crusader against capitalism. I simply don't care.
Also, do they eventually patch that shit off? I would hate to pick up the game ten years from now and not be able to play due to the system no longer being in place.
In any event, I'm glad I have the 360 version.
that's a shame, i must've stroked off after opening the box, and imagined i completed it.
I would also like to know this. I don't have it yet as I spent most of this month's video game budget on Metroid Prime 3, but I was planning on getting this game eventually, and it would suck if I, for stupid copy-protection reasons, needed to get a 360 first. I mean, I was planning to get it on Steam anyway, so this would be good to know.
I'm not going to stand against it, since that'll do nothing but deny me a great game, but it's a pretty dumb way to conduct business. You're essentially denying yourself free marketing.
Edit that shit before you get banned, dumbass.
Color me red and call me Ivan then.
I'm glad you don't buy overpriced download packs. I know I'm missing out on this game, and also other 360 goodness, but I only have time to play but so many games, and I'm full up on stuff to play right now. It is possible I'll get one before the holidays.
This is just one of those games I prefer to play on a PC though. I'm not a big FPS console fan.
If this problem can be solved by getting it through Steam, then I may do that. Steam is a good example of how to protect your games and not totally screw over your consumer.
They're just seeing how much they can get away with, that's all, and it'll take a bunch of gamers openly complaining in order to have them stop. It was the same way with Starforce.
So I say again. I guess I'm a bad man because I borrowed my friend's 360 copy, right?
What about people who rented the game? They didn't buy the game, but they still got the same experience. Are they bad people too?
Renting is a little different as that company paid for the rights to rent it. However, you borrowing your friends 360 version makes you a bad person.
Everytime you share your 360 game, 2k games shoots a baby in the face.
that's cool, babies contribute nothing to society.
Although, not as retarded as if this became a moral argument.
That facetious stupidity aside, I take it that the comment from that one rep isn't indicative of overall 2K policy, and it's just one dumbass spewing out personal opinion and Kokatu making a big deal out of it. Although, really, it's still kind of stupid. I enjoyed Bioshock despite the problems with the PC version, and the 360 d00ders got a way better deal out of the offering. I have a friend that still cannot play it because it would hardcrash everytime he pulled up a vending machine or anything else with a menu.
Borrowing and/or renting games, books, movies, etc. falls under fair use (see: first sale doctrine). Yes, it's not ideal for the company. Ideally, the company would get your entire disposable income, transferred straight from your bank account, every time you started the game. It's not about what's most ideal for "greatest profit for the company", it's about striking a balance between what's best for the company and what's best for the customer.
There is nothing wrong with borrowing, renting, or reselling something you bought. It's legal with this and every other type of property.
Day it was released, my brother ran out and bought a copy. Installed it on his PC that night (activation #1), and his hard drive promptly failed after starting the game (we'd kinda known it was gonna go at any time). Sucks for him, but we just kinda shrugged our shoulders and installed it on my PC (activation #2). No problems there. When my brother's new hard drive that he ordered comes in, he'll be re-installing it on his computer (activation #3).
If you really think that 5 activations within the lifetime of the product (which should theoretically be forever) is enough, you are out of your mind. This game hasn't even touched the hands of any of my friends, and we're already at 3 out of 5 activations. If this game is *that* good, why wouldn't I install it again further down the road when we finally get around to installing Vista (4th activation)? And that's if some piece of hardware doesn't explode before then (5th activation).
How many times do you upgrade your computer. Are you going to want to play Bioshock five or six years from now, after upgrading your computer several times?
They are putting an expiration date on your property for no reason other than that they can. I'm not paying fifty dollars for that shit.
Well, maybe not 5 separate computers. However if your hard drive dies on you or you need to reformat for whatever reason now. Poof, there goes 1 installation activation right there.
The fact that the same computer requires multiple installation activations is just absurd.
Not sure if Bioshock will turn out to be a classic on that level, but you get the idea.
third'd.
Does this become law now?
And the other side is all WHEN YOU LEND GAMES TO OTHER PEOPLE YOU'RE CHEATING THE DEVS OUT OF MONEY! IT'S UNLEGAL OR SOMETHING! IF YOU LEND YOUR CAR TO YOUR FRIEND FOR THE DAY YOU'RE CHEATING FORD OUT OF MONEY!
See, I can use all caps too.
Yeah, if they're still in fucking business five or six years down the line. This is a rather volatile market we're in, you know.
I don't need to, I have the console version. Just saying, there are games that are good enough to play over and over again for a really, really long time.
he actually stated that he will install it on his macbook because he might be too lazy to go upstairs
it's more akin to wishing your car could be in several places at once
There was also this issue though. When the game was released, and people had problems regarding SecuROM, they were told by 2K to contact the SecuROM people. When calling SecuROM, they were directed back to 2K. Not to mention that the original number on the 2K support in the literature was completely wrong.
I'm sure they fixed those issues by now, but still. This is a goddamn $50 game. It's not some operating system or productivity suite costing hundreds or thousands of dollars. Going through these hoops just because you feel today that you suddenly want to play Bioshock or whatever is pretty lame, I think.
Not only that, but why should I have to call them in the first place?
How long will they keep their activation servers active too?
There are many things that are wrong with something of this nature.
i'm not a paranoid conspiracy theorist so i believe the man who gave me bioshock