WSGrundy wrote:It has to be idiots suits that don't really have any idea what is going on because I can't see why the developers themselves wouldn't see this is lame.
As a software developer (not games, though), I would say that it's 99.999% likely that the devs howled with RAGE that they were told to do this, and shook their heads and yelled "I told you so" as they removed the offending code.
thibodeaux wrote:If they even bothered to put it in for real.
I'm starting to wonder too.
Could this be like asking for more then you know you will get in for a raise so that when they counter offer you actually get something you are happy with.
Could they have just wanted the current system to become the norm and asked for something outragous so that when they take it away we think we achived something and they got what they wanted all along? Of couse some of these people still seem like idiots and that plan may be asking a bit much.
I think the managers are clueless enough that some code which was previously in there had to be killed.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
I'm sort of amazed that EA caved. I thought them more arrogant than that.
I assure you, that dude that made that decision, it may be his last for awhile.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Spore is out, and it does include DRM that allows for three installs. Ever. If you uninstall, it doesn't give you back an install count. And if you make a change to your system, that's a count, too.
I rebuild and tweak my system on a monthly basis. No way will I pay $50 for a game I won't be able to use after about three months. I finally caved in to Steam, but this is beyond absurd.
I was absolutely ready to give EA my money, one might even say eager, but they conviced me to pirate Spore instead.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
TPRJones wrote:Spore is out, and it does include DRM that allows for three installs. Ever. If you uninstall, it doesn't give you back an install count. And if you make a change to your system, that's a count, too.
I rebuild and tweak my system on a monthly basis. No way will I pay $50 for a game I won't be able to use after about three months. I finally caved in to Steam, but this is beyond absurd.
I was absolutely ready to give EA my money, one might even say eager, but they conviced me to pirate Spore instead.
Same here. I may have been more interested in spore then any other game ever but not going to pay for the securom shit. Of course they say that if you use up your 3 installs you can just call technical support and get more if you can prove that you bought the game but I shouldn't have to go through that shit to begin with.
Also there is a small protest taking place on amazon. People are giving the game a 1 star rating and complaining about the DRM. The number of 1 star reviews is about 100 an hour and the game has gone down to an overall rating of 1 star. Who knows if it will do anything. People bitched enough about the previous spore and mass effect DRM and it was changed.
For once I find myself happy a game has DRM. I was going to buy Spore, until I heard of the DRM. Once that information became available it was off my to-buy list and I forgot about it.
Then a few days ago I am informed there's a cracked version available. I decide to see if it lived up to the hype and install it. Three hours later, I delete it out of boredom.
If it hadn't been for DRM, that would've been money out the window. There can be but one conclusion. DRM really is there for my benefit.
A lot of others are calling the game boring, as well.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
WSGrundy wrote:Who knows if it will do anything. People bitched enough about the previous spore and mass effect DRM and it was changed.
Don't count on it. While there has been no official statement about the DRM on Spore, EA had this to say yesterday on a related topic:
EA has now confirmed that it won't be dropping the system however and will include it in Red Alert 3, though the SecuROM system will be tweaked. Players will now be allowed five active installs of the game at any one time, the software only authenticate on first-run and you will not need the disc in the drive to play according to a discussion on the EA forums.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
Ditto. I didn't mind when EA would ban folks in their forums for using bad language, unlike other folks, because I understand the different age groups there, how they're running a business, and how they can't afford to lose folks or open themselves up to potential lawsuits/media slams for not controlling their servers.
I did, however, get a bit tweaked hearing about the working conditions their programmers experience. Still, that's those individuals' business. If they don't like it, they can stop doing annual updates for crap like Madden and go make something original for another publisher. Hell, they can do it themselves and distribute it via Steam.
This, however, will prevent me from buying anything "EA". I don't have to call Chrysler for permission to use my car after I refill it with gas three times. I don't call the bank to ask them if I can build a deck in my backyard. I don't call the meat market to see if I'm allowed to broil or grill the steaks I purchased. I certainly don't have to get Blockbuster's permission to watch a movie I rented more than once.
Why does EA think it has the right to limit the number of times I install their games? There are sooooo many examples of why one would need to install their game more than 3 times that I won't bother going into them. This policy is a spit in the face of the EA customer. They need to stop treating ALL of their customers as if they were ALL pirates.
I mean, let's follow the logic here:
Take 10 people and if one commits a crime, by EA's logic, we should put all 10 in jail.
EA has long been mocked for their executive decisions, this is yet more proof that the company cares little for it's consumers outside of what's in their pockets.
Fuck you EA.
(With a bit of tweaking, this could easy be a front page post Mr. Gordo.)
"Happy slaves are the worst enemies of freedom." - Marie Von Ebner
"It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies..." - Orwell
I think the problem, Leisher, is that 9 of the 10 people are committing a crime, not just one.
Software piracy on the PC is huge, especially with gamers. I don't like their solution either, but what should they do? Make it like consoles? Can only be played with the disc? Sure, once people figure out how to make PCs as unhackable as consoles.
Only release online games or stuff like Steam?
Leisher, your comparisons all deal with physical goods, which don't have the replication issues of software. Chrysler doesn't give a shit what you do with your car, because they already have their revenue. You can't just buy a car, then give a copy to your friend.
And yeah, companies tend to want money. funny that. Let's discuss capitalism some day.
TheCatt wrote:Leisher, your comparisons all deal with physical goods, which don't have the replication issues of software. Chrysler doesn't give a shit what you do with your car, because they already have their revenue. You can't just buy a car, then give a copy to your friend.
Seems to me a better example would be Chrysler having a thumbprint-recognition drive next to the steering console that would guarantee you can never loan the car to your buddy for the night. Only the original purchaser of the car is licensed to drive it.
And I disagree with the "study" that claimed pc games are purated 10 times more than they are purchased, and that DRM is the way to fix that.
It never takes more than a day for a cracked game to be released, and a lot of people who do DL the game would never have bought it, anyway. DRM only hurts the suckers who legally purchased the game, and as such they are ensuring people who would otherwise buy the game, won't. Yes, I'm saying it, DRM is absolutely hurting the pc game industry more than it is helping.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Amazon UK has already deleted all of their 1-star reviews of this game.
"Getting Spored" is becoming a new colloquialism.
And EA, in a press release, has refered to everyone who doesn't like DRM as "petulant children." I can't find a link to EA's actual response, though, for what it's worth.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
I think piracy hurts, a lot. A lot of people download cracked games to "try them out" then either get done/finished/bored with it, or figure "hey, i've already got it, why pay?" and don't bother spending the money. With consoles, if you want to try it you have to buy it first (or rent/borrow/etc)... either way, the publishers are doing much better.
I think the problem, Leisher, is that 9 of the 10 people are committing a crime, not just one.
I disagree with it being 9 out of 10. Such a figure would mean each game is selling 1 unit where it should be selling 10. Not to mention it'd indicate that the majority of gamers have the knowledge of where to find cracked games and how to get them working. Sometimes that process is such a clusterfuck it makes one wish they'd have just bought the game.
Software piracy on the PC is huge, especially with gamers. I don't like their solution either, but what should they do? Make it like consoles? Can only be played with the disc? Sure, once people figure out how to make PCs as unhackable as consoles.
Consoles can be hacked. You can buy an X-Box hard drive with a shitload of pirated games on it.
What I'd like is for them to not treat consumers like criminals. Granted, that might be an impossibility for them in this age of piracy, but even if they have to put some measures in place, they need to treat the customers with respect. That's something that is missing from EA's corporate attitude.
It's actually something that's missing in the relationship between consumers and producers in the gaming industry.
For example:
For every asshole who pirates something great like Half-Life, there's also a company who's making a piece of shit to fleece the public. Look at any licensed game based on a movie. They're usually complete ass and have one function, to make a buck, consumer be damned.
Speaking of Not to mention all the buggy games that are released. Using EA as an example, they're the assholes who released Ultima 9 as a buggy and unplayable piece of shit. If you sell products that are broken so badly that they cannot even be played, then perhaps you deserve to have customers steal your products rather than pay for them.
Let's be honest, nobody is monitoring the gaming industry, so the corporations are getting away with some bullshit on their consumer base. Buggy products are the norm, not the exception. Ditto for poorly made products.
Does that excuse the pirates? Of course not. However, I would argue that some pirates have been pushed into or further into their activities because they've paid $60 for a game that lasts 4 hours.
Back to the point, what can they do? I don't know, that's up to them. If I knew how to combat piracy, I wouldn't be typing this response to you, I'd be sitting on my own island drinking a jack and coke and wondering which Hollywood starlet I'd sleep with tonight.
Still, there has to be a better way than what they're doing which is to put all the burden on the consumer. The consumer is being forced to jump through all these hoops and like Gordon points out, the pirates don't.
I absolutely agree with him that these "anti-piracy" measures are only punishing normal consumers. Even worse, instead of protecting the industry, they're driving more consumers away.
Take a look at consoles. They're nothing more than a underpowered PC sans keyboard and mouse. Yet people, even people who own PCs, prefer them as a gaming console to the PC. The PC has more options for controls, speakers, seats, hardware, etc. yet folks want to play on the console. Sure, convenience has something to do with it because of the plug and play nature of consoles. However, if you ask people, they'll cite the ridiculous hoops one has to jump through to make a PC Game work. First there are system requirements. Then, you have to install the game (now appearing on consoles). You also need a key to get the game to properly install. Sometimes you need an internet connection to register. Now you can't install it more than 3 times?
Most people, as most of us here know, have no clue what version of Windows they're running let alone their processor type/speed, amount of RAM, etc. How are they supposed to deal with mounting requirements for PC knowledge?
I can drive a car, but that doesn't mean I know all the technical details of how everything works or what's under the hood.
Point being, they need to make things easier on the PC Gaming consumer, not more difficult. Punish the pirates, not Joe Schmoe who bought his copy of FarCry2 at Walmart.
Only release online games or stuff like Steam?
I'm a huge fan of brick and mortar stores as I like to hold a product and review it before purchase, however I've had nothing but good experiences with Steam thus far. Of course, that's Valve running things, not EA. What happens when an EA creates their own Steam-like service? If they run it like they currently run things, it won't be good.
Leisher, your comparisons all deal with physical goods, which don't have the replication issues of software. Chrysler doesn't give a shit what you do with your car, because they already have their revenue. You can't just buy a car, then give a copy to your friend.
True, but movies get pirated and I have yet to encounter a DVD I was only allowed to watch 3 times. I've yet to put a movie in that asks me to tell it what the third word is on page 6 of the DVD booklet.
And yeah, companies tend to want money. funny that. Let's discuss capitalism some day.
Don't get all holier than thou are. I'm well aware of the goal of any business, but that doesn't mean I have to think consumers need to bend over and take the company's ignorance up their ass.
"Happy slaves are the worst enemies of freedom." - Marie Von Ebner
"It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies..." - Orwell
This policy is a spit in the face of the EA customer. They need to stop treating ALL of their customers as if they were ALL pirates.
Not exactly. The major issue is the three times limit, yes? That's not about piracy, you could just as easily get the exact same results in terms of piracy from unlmited installs.
This three times thing is specifically meant to target the used games market. They're making it so that when you go to EB Games and buy Spore used, it may or may not actually work, and even if it does you may only have that one installation left. They have been very eager to get their share of the used games market, and this is their way of trying to shut it down, or at least get them to stop reselling used EA games. There is no other reasonable explanation for the installation limits.
Which, in my mind, makes this even worse. Forget pirates, which are at least breaking the law, they're putting in this shit that's fucking over their real customers just to curtail used game sales. WTF?
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"