The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

Oh yes, "evil" EA is gone for good...

12123252627

Posts

  • RakaiRakai Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Daedalus wrote: »
    Rakai wrote: »
    Daedalus wrote: »
    Rakai wrote: »
    Also, Bioware has always use SecuRoM
    Q: When EA acquired Bioware, I knew that using SecuROM would be one of the major changes since EA is one of the most powerful Securom supporters.

    A: Actually, Neverwinter Nights, Knights of the Old republic, Jade Empire, and Mass Effect all use SecuROM in some manner.
    and given that this security measure is the latest "upgrade" to SecuROM, this seems more like business as usual rather than EA coming in and changing things.

    older versions of SecuROM weren't retarded. SecuROM used to just be the standard "check to see if the CD in the drive is an original copy" stuff. It's the latest version of it that turned it into "frequent installations will invalidate your CD key" retard rodeo.

    As for it not being EA changing things, well, it's not like SecuROM is the only protection system on the market.

    The point is Bioware always turned to SecuROM for its copy-protection. There is no indication that Bioware was planning to ditch them unless you consider that there was the ME: PC edition before EA came into the picture.

    True, and I think that ultimately, SecuROM is the company that will suffer the most from this, not Bioware or EA. After all, that's how the Starforce dramedy played out. Consumer backlash will lead to them switching over to something less obnoxious and retarded.

    Of course, that means that we've got to backlash in the first place.

    Exactly. When developers used Starforce nobody said they were "evil" or that they were trying to screw over the customers. They simply said Starforce sucks and gave feedback that it was unacceptable. This lead to it being dropped. Same situation here. The companies aren't evil or trying to screw over the customers, they're just using the latest copy-protection scheme. While I may disagree on the severity of the issues, I don't disagree with giving negative feedback. Just don't go around calling EA "evil" because it makes you sound like a raving lunatic. (I'm using "you" in the general sense, not you specifically.)

    Rakai on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]XBL: Rakayn | PS3: Rakayn | Steam ID
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Sidenote: if there is a GTAIV PC port, will it use this Securom? Take-Two's last big-name PC release did.
    God damn it. D:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SecuROM#Known_problems
    The Sims 2 and most of its subsequent add-ons have previously been using SafeDisc for copy protection until April 2007. However, since then, Electronic Arts has replaced SafeDisc with SecuROM v 7.x software protection, which is included with The Sims Pet Stories, The Sims Castaway Stories, The Sims 2 Deluxe, The Sims 2: H&M Fashion Stuff, The Sims 2: Bon Voyage, The Sims 2: Teen Style Stuff and The Sims 2: FreeTime, but commonly The Sims 2: Bon Voyage caused the problem than the other titles stated above. Some users have been reporting problems with launching the game, CD-burners or anti-virus protection, due to SecuROM. EA attempted to address some of these concerns on the official website. They instructed users on how to remove the software from their computers.[6] Users who asked about the removal of SecuROM were recommended to not do so, since it can affect the functioning of The Sims 2: Bon Voyage and other EA games that use SecuROM.[7]

    Couscous on
  • Captain KCaptain K Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    What do you think the last 30 fucking pages have been? Nothing but backlash

    Well, more like angry fist-shaking behind closed doors.

    Actual backlash would require getting in touch with EA, getting in touch with Bioware, not buying the game, etc. Words spoken here don't really matter to EA--they're not paying attention.

    Captain K on
  • edited May 2008
    This content has been removed.

  • TheSonicRetardTheSonicRetard Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Captain K wrote: »
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    What do you think the last 30 fucking pages have been? Nothing but backlash

    Well, more like angry fist-shaking behind closed doors.

    Actual backlash would require getting in touch with EA, getting in touch with Bioware, not buying the game, etc. Words spoken here don't really matter to EA--they're not paying attention.

    this of course assumes 1) EA doesn't read the forums (they do), 2) Bioware isn't in active discussion about this security (they are), 3) People are still buying the game (they aren't), and 4) EA isn't paying attention (they are).

    TheSonicRetard on
  • SzechuanosaurusSzechuanosaurus Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2008
    Captain K wrote: »
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    What do you think the last 30 fucking pages have been? Nothing but backlash

    Well, more like angry fist-shaking behind closed doors.

    Actual backlash would require getting in touch with EA, getting in touch with Bioware, not buying the game, etc. Words spoken here don't really matter to EA--they're not paying attention.

    I was going to send them a link to this thread through their CS contact but I need to register an account to contact them :(

    Szechuanosaurus on
  • SzechuanosaurusSzechuanosaurus Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2008
    Captain K wrote: »
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    What do you think the last 30 fucking pages have been? Nothing but backlash

    Well, more like angry fist-shaking behind closed doors.

    Actual backlash would require getting in touch with EA, getting in touch with Bioware, not buying the game, etc. Words spoken here don't really matter to EA--they're not paying attention.

    this of course assumes 1) EA doesn't read the forums (they do),

    Huh? This forum? Really?

    Szechuanosaurus on
  • Captain KCaptain K Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Come on, you know what I mean.

    Raging in a webcomic forum thread is a pretty poor method of making your voice heard. If people really care about EA hearing them, they should email, call, what have you.

    Hey, it's possible people are already doing it.

    Captain K on
  • edited May 2008
    This content has been removed.

  • TheSonicRetardTheSonicRetard Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Captain K wrote: »
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    What do you think the last 30 fucking pages have been? Nothing but backlash

    Well, more like angry fist-shaking behind closed doors.

    Actual backlash would require getting in touch with EA, getting in touch with Bioware, not buying the game, etc. Words spoken here don't really matter to EA--they're not paying attention.

    this of course assumes 1) EA doesn't read the forums (they do),

    Huh? This forum? Really?

    Several game companies read forums like these, believe it or not.

    Officially, they have groups of people who go and read forums for feedback, or to spread messages, although this form of communication is rare. Secretly, they also have hired advertisers who spam forums to get the word out about their upcoming games and generate hype.

    And finally, unofficially, several developers frequent this board. Xeiflow works for EA, for example - he is a developer for the Sims.

    TheSonicRetard on
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products, Transition Team regular
    edited May 2008
    I am not in support of this, mind you... but I do want to know how this is so very different from Steam requiring online activation of valve's flagship games, even if you buy the box in the store.

    syndalis on
    SW-4158-3990-6116
    Let's play Mario Kart or something...
  • TheSonicRetardTheSonicRetard Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    syndalis wrote: »
    I am not in support of this, mind you... but I do want to know how this is so very different from Steam requiring online activation of valve's flagship games, even if you buy the box in the store.

    *smacks head*

    TheSonicRetard on
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    syndalis wrote: »
    I am not in support of this, mind you... but I do want to know how this is so very different from Steam requiring online activation of valve's flagship games, even if you buy the box in the store.

    That is annoying. However, this is basically that except you have to basically activate it every 10 days instead of just once, and it comes with the shitty Take Two restriction of only being able to have three copies activated on three machines.

    Couscous on
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    syndalis wrote: »
    I am not in support of this, mind you... but I do want to know how this is so very different from Steam requiring online activation of valve's flagship games, even if you buy the box in the store.

    SecuROM limits the amount of times you can reinstall their games before you need to call up a customer support line that may or may not only be open while you're at work and beg them to reactivate your key while convincing them that you're not a pirate.

    Daedalus on
  • GoombaGoomba __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2008
    syndalis wrote: »
    I am not in support of this, mind you... but I do want to know how this is so very different from Steam requiring online activation of valve's flagship games, even if you buy the box in the store.
    Reoccuring checks.

    Goomba on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Captain K wrote: »
    Come on, you know what I mean.

    Raging in a webcomic forum thread is a pretty poor method of making your voice heard. If people really care about EA hearing them, they should email, call, what have you.

    Hey, it's possible people are already doing it.

    The sentiments in this thread are mirrored everywhere on every gaming forum I know of.

    And places like gaf, or ign, quarter to 3 etc ave large publisher and developer memberships. Heck, these forums have a few regular bioware posters.

    The_Scarab on
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products, Transition Team regular
    edited May 2008
    Goomba wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    I am not in support of this, mind you... but I do want to know how this is so very different from Steam requiring online activation of valve's flagship games, even if you buy the box in the store.
    Reoccuring checks.
    Doesn't valve require the same same thing (must launch from an online steam account with a purchase history from the game) unless you purposefully hunt out the location of the offline mode, which cannot be activated while you do not have access to the tubes?

    I just remember a lot of people bitching about it.

    syndalis on
    SW-4158-3990-6116
    Let's play Mario Kart or something...
  • GoombaGoomba __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2008
    syndalis wrote: »
    Goomba wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    I am not in support of this, mind you... but I do want to know how this is so very different from Steam requiring online activation of valve's flagship games, even if you buy the box in the store.
    Reoccuring checks.
    Doesn't valve require the same same thing (must launch from an online steam account with a purchase history from the game) unless you purposefully hunt out the location of the offline mode, which cannot be activated while you do not have access to the tubes?

    I just remember a lot of people bitching about it.
    Well, apparently you can disable that. That, and there's the three install limit thing that I don't know how it works, but according to the one guy, not very good. But as far as the online thing goes, Steam isn't any better, according to TSR.

    Goomba on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Saul MaloneSaul Malone Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    syndalis wrote: »
    Reoccuring checks.
    Doesn't valve require the same same thing (must launch from an online steam account with a purchase history from the game) unless you purposefully hunt out the location of the offline mode, which cannot be activated while you do not have access to the tubes?

    I just remember a lot of people bitching about it.[/quote]
    Yeah there is, but then it doesn't take long to figure out how to force it to work in offline mode so v:|v.
    Also, the only people who like steam are in North America. For the rest of the world Steam really sucks.

    Saul Malone on
  • RakaiRakai Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    syndalis wrote: »
    Goomba wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    I am not in support of this, mind you... but I do want to know how this is so very different from Steam requiring online activation of valve's flagship games, even if you buy the box in the store.
    Reoccuring checks.
    Doesn't valve require the same same thing (must launch from an online steam account with a purchase history from the game) unless you purposefully hunt out the location of the offline mode, which cannot be activated while you do not have access to the tubes?

    I just remember a lot of people bitching about it.

    Aye, if you use online mode you're subject to being blocked out if you lose internet connection on any given day and you can't simply switch to offline mode without being connected to the internet (that I'm aware of.) There difference really comes down to: Steam lets you install on as many computers as you like but ties the game to your account making it impossible to give away the game while SecuROM limits your installs but you can reclaim them and give your copy of the game to someone else if you want (I think). Personally, since I don't give my games away, Steam is preferable to me.

    Rakai on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]XBL: Rakayn | PS3: Rakayn | Steam ID
  • SzechuanosaurusSzechuanosaurus Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2008
    Daedalus wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    I am not in support of this, mind you... but I do want to know how this is so very different from Steam requiring online activation of valve's flagship games, even if you buy the box in the store.

    SecuROM limits the amount of times you can reinstall their games before you need to call up a customer support line that may or may not only be open while you're at work and beg them to reactivate your key while convincing them that you're not a pirate.

    Is having the DVD in the drive still required with SecuROM? From what I understand it just checks the license key and the computer's unique ID but no mention is made of checking the DVD. If that were the case, I'd rather have a check once every ten days than a check every time I try to play a game. Having to swap DVDs is a pain in the arse and systems like Steam are great for not requiring it.

    Szechuanosaurus on
  • The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Lots of games on steam can be launched from the steam directory without being online or even when steam is not running.

    The_Scarab on
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Rakai wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    Goomba wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    I am not in support of this, mind you... but I do want to know how this is so very different from Steam requiring online activation of valve's flagship games, even if you buy the box in the store.
    Reoccuring checks.
    Doesn't valve require the same same thing (must launch from an online steam account with a purchase history from the game) unless you purposefully hunt out the location of the offline mode, which cannot be activated while you do not have access to the tubes?

    I just remember a lot of people bitching about it.

    Aye, if you use online mode you're subject to being blocked out if you lose internet connection on any given day and you can't simply switch to offline mode without being connected to the internet (that I'm aware of.) There difference really comes down to: Steam lets you install on as many computers as you like but ties the game to your account making it impossible to give away the game while SecuROM limits your installs but you can reclaim them and give your copy of the game to someone else if you want (I think).

    Nope, the SecuROM installs are tied to "a machine-unique identifier", so you'll have some trouble reselling them. Or installing it at all four computer upgrades from now, and before anyone says that's ridiculous, how many computers have you gone through since you first got, say, Deus Ex?

    I mean, you could call Customer Support, tell them that you bought your copy used from eBay or Goozex, and get laughed at and hung up on. That's also an option.

    Daedalus on
  • RakaiRakai Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Google tells me that Bioshock lets you unregister an installation so I thought this was inherent to the copy-protection scheme. ME: PC doesn't allow this?

    Rakai on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]XBL: Rakayn | PS3: Rakayn | Steam ID
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Rakai wrote: »
    Google tells me that Bioshock lets you unregister an installation so I thought this was inherent to the copy-protection scheme. ME: PC doesn't allow this?

    If you uninstall while not connected to the Internet, your installation doesn't get "unregistered".

    And really, you're going to trust every used game seller to make sure to properly uninstall every time?

    Daedalus on
  • LewiePLewieP Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    The point is, if you don't go through the uninstall procedure, then it is gone forever.

    There are a hundred and one reasons you might not go through the uninstall procedure. Corrupted windows install, busted hard drive, new PC, stolen PC, hell..forgetfulness.

    LewieP on
  • GoombaGoomba __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2008
    So you can get installs back is what you're saying. So that whole "4 computers later and you're SOL" rant thing was, what? Pointless?

    Goomba on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • RakaiRakai Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    I never said anything about reviving the used PC game market. I simply stated that it was possible to give your game to a friend if you want, something Steam currently doesn't allow.

    edit: Also I'm sure you can call up EA and reclaim lost installations if it comes to that.

    Rakai on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]XBL: Rakayn | PS3: Rakayn | Steam ID
  • LewiePLewieP Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Goomba wrote: »
    So you can get installs back is what you're saying. So that whole "4 computers later and you're SOL" rant thing was, what? Pointless?

    You can, but it's perfectly reasonable for someone to go through them and be unable to recover them.

    Basically, it treats every install like you are giving it away to someone else for free unless you prove otherwise.

    Whereas a pirated and burnt disc wouldn't. It would let you install is as many times as you want.

    LewieP on
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Goomba wrote: »
    So you can get installs back is what you're saying. So that whole "4 computers later and you're SOL" rant thing was, what? Pointless?

    Hey, it's theoretically possible to get installs back if everything works perfectly and you always uninstall all your software using the uninstall program before you reformat or your hard drive starts a-clickin'. Clearly this copy protection scheme is all just fine and isn't raising unreasonable restrictions above and beyond what we've been used to for decades.

    Daedalus on
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    The FAQ says that the installation isn't what matters. It is the activation.

    Q: How many installations will SecuROM allow from my copy of MEPC?

    A: Since SecuROM has nothing to do with the installer, you can install and uninstall on the same machine over and over again without any problems. SecuROM also allows you to activate the game on 3 different machines.
    I I am reading this correctly, because of this, uninstalling it won't free up any extra slots.
    http://blog.wired.com/games/2008/05/mass-effect-pc.html
    According to Derek French, Mass Effect's technical producer at BioWare, the game's security begins with the same SecuROM online activation that aggravated so many owners of BioShock for PC. The system allows the user to activate the game three times before being required to contact a customer service rep to have it reactivated.

    Couscous on
  • KhavallKhavall British ColumbiaRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    LewieP wrote: »
    Goomba wrote: »
    So you can get installs back is what you're saying. So that whole "4 computers later and you're SOL" rant thing was, what? Pointless?

    You can, but it's perfectly reasonable for someone to go through them and be unable to recover them.

    Basically, it treats every install like you are giving it away to someone else for free unless you prove otherwise.

    Whereas a pirated and burnt disc wouldn't. It would let you install is as many times as you want.

    To be fair, though, I have a feeling that if you explained that to EA on the phone they might say something other than "FUCK YOU".


    I mean, again, I don't think they actually did it just to fuck over customers.

    Khavall on
  • GoombaGoomba __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2008
    LewieP wrote: »
    Goomba wrote: »
    So you can get installs back is what you're saying. So that whole "4 computers later and you're SOL" rant thing was, what? Pointless?

    You can, but it's perfectly reasonable for someone to go through them and be unable to recover them.
    I guess that's why they have tech support.

    Goomba on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • DrunkMcDrunkMc Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    It just annoys me because this will not deter pirates but it will inconvenience the people who actually buy the game. Why won't companies get this through their thick head.

    DrunkMc on
  • GoombaGoomba __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2008
    DrunkMc wrote: »
    It just annoys me because this will not deter pirates but it will inconvenience the people who actually buy the game. Why won't companies get this through their thick head.
    What's your suggestion?

    Goomba on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    The official FAQ doesn't say anything about being able to get them back by uninstalling the game. It doesn't really say anything at all about getting the activations back.

    Couscous on
  • DroolDrool Science! AustinRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Gee an invisible check that happens when I hit the Mass Effect.exe. It requires no extra registration/download or time from me all it requires is an internet connection, and this requirement is clearly labled on the box.

    For this I don't have to have the CD installed. I'm always on the damn internet anyway. I'm ok with this trade and will be getting this on the 27th.

    I skipped most of this thread, but do people realize how it works? You don't have to keep turning on ME every 10 days. If you haven't played in more than 10 days it will do the check, so you just have to be online, after not playing for awhile, and if your internet is down fucking fix it and then play ME.

    Drool on
  • KhavallKhavall British ColumbiaRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Goomba wrote: »
    DrunkMc wrote: »
    It just annoys me because this will not deter pirates but it will inconvenience the people who actually buy the game. Why won't companies get this through their thick head.
    What's your suggestion?

    Actually I have a good one.



    Patch in the lack of activation once it's cracked.

    Khavall on
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    DrunkMc wrote: »
    It just annoys me because this will not deter pirates but it will inconvenience the people who actually buy the game. Why won't companies get this through their thick head.

    Some have.

    Daedalus on
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Khavall wrote: »
    Goomba wrote: »
    DrunkMc wrote: »
    It just annoys me because this will not deter pirates but it will inconvenience the people who actually buy the game. Why won't companies get this through their thick head.
    What's your suggestion?

    Actually I have a good one.



    Patch in the lack of activation once it's cracked.

    But I thought we were supposed to frown on release-day patches?

    Daedalus on
This discussion has been closed.