 |
| |
|
|
Technical Assistant
Of the Peanuts Gallery
|
Apr 2004
time: 13:52
| |
|
|
Meh, I don't have a problem with that... there's reasonable discussion, and there's the overboard that I'm sure the site went to before they posted that. I don't follow the Spore boards of course, but on the BioWare boards they were entirely reasonable - they permitted it occasionally but when it went overboard shut it down, as they should.
They could've been nicer about it, but frankly I think that is a perfectly reasonable post. I don't like the 'have to buy another copy' part but I also don't think it's accurate.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Yeah it's very accurate actually. Since your forum account is your Spore game account.
EDIT:
Also, there were 4-8 DRM/SecureROM discussion threads going on, out of the hundreds that have been active over the last few days. I don't consider that "over and over".
I just see it as a way that EA can try to silence the issue. And another way to strongarm the public.
Last edited by Dale on 21-09-2008 at 01:43
|
|
| |
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wiglaf
Snore. So they made it hard for you to steal their work. Boo hoo. Justin Timberlake sang a song about this, he named it Cry Me a River, I am not gay, but SEXY. |
Get a clue mate. Their game is the easiest to steal. Been on torrent even before US release date.
|
|
| |
|
|
Co-Founder
Macedonia, Greece
|
Aug 1998
time: 21:52
| |
|
|
me buying spore just got postponed for a few months, if ever...
|
|
| |
|
|
Co-Administrator
Latvia, Riga
|
Sep 2000
time: 21:52
| |
|
|
Hope that bites them back in the ass. Given how much pirated Spore is and, of course, the pirates once again offer a better product. Interestingly, they even came up with convenient ways to get player-created creatures in pirated games so pirates are no longer limited to content that's on the CD as it was the case initially.
|
|
| |
|
FrostyBoy
|
|
|
|
Emperor
of Kiwis
|
Aug 2001
time: 03:52
| |
|
|
It's all too true.
If EA would just ****ing compromise with its customers, we would all win in the end.
I was at a gaming conference recently, and in one talk, a guy was saying that people need to treat this business LIKE A BUSINESS. At the end of his talk, I stood up and told him (it's meant to be a questionnaire  ) that treating the gaming industry like a business is EXACTLY WHAT'S WRONG WITH IT. The gamer loses, and if the gamer loses, the publishers lose, if the publisher loses, the developers lose.
But him, being all talk, and no play, in his fancy suit, could not fathom that and doesn't agree with it. I told him that if this trend keeps up, the industry will be desaturated to a point where gamers just give up trying to hope for a decent release.
They think it's all about cutting costs, protecting themselves and taking control.
|
|
| |
|
|
Emperor
New Syracuse, Beta Prime
|
Dec 2001
time: 14:52
| |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by FrostyBoy
I was at a gaming conference recently, and in one talk, a guy was saying that people need to treat this business LIKE A BUSINESS. At the end of his talk, I stood up and told him (it's meant to be a questionnaire ) that treating the gaming industry like a business is EXACTLY WHAT'S WRONG WITH IT. The gamer loses, and if the gamer loses, the publishers lose, if the publisher loses, the developers lose.
But him, being all talk, and no play, in his fancy suit, could not fathom that and doesn't agree with it. I told him that if this trend keeps up, the industry will be desaturated to a point where gamers just give up trying to hope for a decent release. |
I'm going to play devil's advocate here and throw some thoughts and observations out, as follows:
1) The TV Industry had its Golden Years in the 50's and 60's, and since then it has steadily declined in content value as it was continually gutted by suits who were looking after the bottom line, until you have the meaningless drivel that passes for TV today. And yet a majority of homes in the US (and a lot of other developed countries) still pay premium money for CATV, regardless of the crap content they are receiving!
2) The Movie Industry has steadily gone downhill since the '90s, and yet the price of tickets and condiments still continues to stay the same, if not increase. Why? Because people are continueing to pay these exhorbitant prices, even for less content. The Movie Industry is a business, and a revenue stream, and it is being squeezed for every last penny.
3) The Gaming Industry had its heyday in the '90s and early 2000's, however now this entertainment venue is simply entering the pantheon of other entertainment venues (as listed above), and so is no longer unique or cutting edge. Following the formula of those before it, the suits will come in and gut it, squeezing for every last penny.
Another thought, still playing devil's advocate here, is "how are Spore's sales doing these first few weeks from its release?". Is the game selling well to the average masses? The reason I ask this is that truth speaks in numbers: is the average person, who probably pays for CATV and goes to movie theatres, not concerned enough about the DRM and SecureRom to stop them from buying the game?
D
|
|
| |
|
|
Emperor
Monterrey, Mexico
|
Jun 2001
time: 13:52
| |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by EternalSpark
And once again - it's the pirates (even the righteously indignant ones) that are to blame for DRM, not the publishers. If y'all just decided to pay the 50-or-so bucks for your games instead of rushing to TPB to grab it, we wouldn't have to deal with Securom. Spore being pirated doesn't show the insignificance of DRM, it shows that it doesn't go far enough, sadly. |
I think you are to blame.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
quote:
And once again - it's the pirates (even the righteously indignant ones) that are to blame for DRM, not the publishers. If y'all just decided to pay the 50-or-so bucks for your games instead of rushing to TPB to grab it, we wouldn't have to deal with Securom. Spore being pirated doesn't show the insignificance of DRM, it shows that it doesn't go far enough, sadly. |
You obviously know nothing about the legal ramifications of DRM, and the controls it places on YOU the user.
The power these publishers have over you through DRM is immense. I think you need to read up on what it is, and what freedoms you the customer give up.
Piracy == bad
DRM == bad
Bottom line.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
EternalSpark
|
|
 |
|
Prince
|
Feb 2000
time: 19:52
| |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dale
You obviously know nothing about the legal ramifications of DRM, and the controls it places on YOU the user.
|
I know about the legal ramifications and the controls it places on me. They don't justify me downloading the game for free, though. Besides, if I want to argue the whole "Don't treat me like a pirate" line, it's extremely important to not be a pirate!
I'd love to go back in time and show a snapshot of today to all those lazy little bastards that whined so very hard about having to take a small shiny disk in their computer to play a game.
quote:
Originally posted by Dale
The power these publishers have over you through DRM is immense. I think you need to read up on what it is, and what freedoms you the customer give up.
|
Powers they have over us because we told them we can't control ourselves.
Freedoms we gave up? We surrendered them.
I accept DRM because - shock - I'm not a pirate. Those that ***** about it and use it as a reason to be a pirate are the ones that are the problem.
quote:
Originally posted by Dale
Piracy == bad
DRM == bad
Bottom line. |
Piracy begats DRM. It's unarguable. Well, I suppose it's arguable, but you'd need a TARDIS or a DeLorean to change historical facts in order to greatly alter stuff so that you'd have anything to convince me otherwise.
You guys think I like DRM. I dislike it. But you know what? We brought it on ourselves. As a community, we have to look at ourselves, admit that, and go from there. We're reaping what us gamers sow.
Last edited by EternalSpark on 22-09-2008 at 16:41
|
|
| |
|
|
Prince
Ghent
|
Apr 2002
time: 20:52
| |
|
|
Not on my hard disk...
|
|
| |
|
|
Co-Administrator
Latvia, Riga
|
Sep 2000
time: 21:52
| |
|
|
EternalSpark, I think your line of reasoning is completely wrong. It's like living in a totalitarian police state and saying people brought it upon themselves because they commit crimes and need the control.
Saying that DRM exists just because piracy exists is faulty. Yes, in a broad sense, such protective measures exist because of piracy. But if there were no piracy, the only thing you'd see is a "hey, there's no piracy, so our approach works" statement and DRM would continue.
Likewise, the people who "whine" about games needing a CD to play aren't the ones being punished. DRM punishes people who do, after all, choose to accept whatever the publisher does - CD checks, installation limits or whatever. Pirates continue pirating as happily as ever, people who paid for the game are also still easily able to find and use a crack. DRM has changed absolutely nothing compared to what it was like when the restrictions were softer. The only thing that's changed is that customers who don't use cracks are getting restricted more than before. For pirates, nothing changes. For customers who use cracks, nothing changes.
I am really glad that there are some companies taking a good approach with game distribution. I understand the approach of trying to put some protection in, but then the distribution system should not make its protection a painful issue for customers and should, ideally, actually add some convenience.
|
|
| |
|
|
EternalSpark
|
|
|
|
Prince
|
Feb 2000
time: 19:52
| |
|
|
quote:
It's like living in a totalitarian police state and saying people brought it upon themselves because they commit crimes and need the control.
|
I'd rather not get into the philosophical nature of the argument (given that "philosophical" is another word for "pointless"), but if society turned as unlawful in real life as they did online (The looting in post-Katrina NOLA comes to mind, but its the only analogy I can think of), you'd be damn sure I'd be thinking that the government should have a stricter hand on things. And I don't think I'd be the only one.
quote:
But if there were no piracy, the only thing you'd see is a "hey, there's no piracy, so our approach works" statement and DRM would continue.
|
We agree there.
quote:
The only thing that's changed is that customers who don't use cracks are getting restricted more than before. For pirates, nothing changes. For customers who use cracks, nothing changes.
|
If I were a publisher making computer games that cost in the millions to produce, I'd really need to find some solid proof that the groups you mentioned were seperate entities.
That sounds like a troll, but think about it. EA obviously knows that Spore is being pirated a lot. They've got numbers on that front that show them as such. But what solid, numerical evidence do they have to convince them that we're not all selfish, immoral, cheap pirates? Very little, I'd say. Sure, nerds online point at Stardock, but... c'mon, it's Stardock.
quote:
understand the approach of trying to put some protection in, but then the distribution system should not make its protection a painful issue for customers and should, ideally, actually add some convenience.
|
I would argue that the most of the alleged "pain" from Spore's DRM are actually very trivial when it comes to your average gamer. The only DRM that I can see being a problem to your everyday average gamer is the three-install limit.
|
|
| |
|
|
Co-Administrator
Latvia, Riga
|
Sep 2000
time: 21:52
| |
|
|
quote:
I'd rather not get into the philosophical nature of the argument (given that "philosophical" is another word for "pointless"), but if society turned as unlawful in real life as they did online (The looting in post-Katrina NOLA comes to mind, but its the only analogy I can think of), you'd be damn sure I'd be thinking that the government should have a stricter hand on things. And I don't think I'd be the only one. |
You're right that it's a philosophical argument in no small part. I'll just say I disagree with your philosophy on this, I think that stricter control is rarely the right answer (although sometimes it is an effective answer) to most of the society's problem.
quote:
If I were a publisher making computer games that cost in the millions to produce, I'd really need to find some solid proof that the groups you mentioned were seperate entities.
That sounds like a troll, but think about it. EA obviously knows that Spore is being pirated a lot. They've got numbers on that front that show them as such. But what solid, numerical evidence do they have to convince them that we're not all selfish, immoral, cheap pirates? Very little, I'd say. Sure, nerds online point at Stardock, but... c'mon, it's Stardock. |
You know, a lot of research is done into piracy. I think that the very fact that games sell well at all is excellent proof that all people aren't potential pirates because, let's admit it, pirating games is ridiculously easy. And let's remember that pirated games are identical to legit games. Sometimes, for online games, pirated versions have no/reduced online capability. But look at, say, Bioshock - it's sold over a million copies in less than a year and it's a single-player only game. It's one of those games where a pirated version has no functionality loss whatsoever, and somehow all people didn't choose to pirate it. Same for Bethesda games.
And Stardock is a very valid example. They are excellent proof that games do sell if they include no copy protection. Sure, Stardock games don't approach the sales numbers of Maxis, Firaxis or Valve games but then again, Stardock is a much smaller company and perhaps more interestingly, their games are quite niche, even among the strategy genre.
I recently got Company of Heroes Gold. The game doesn't require the CD if you sign in to your online account. So its online features are a good enough reason to buy apparently. It just goes to show that if you make a half-decent game, people are indeed ready to pay.
I'd also argue that other social aspects show similar conclusions. Say, shoplifting - modern supermarkets are designed so that the business has to resign itself to some shoplifting issues, you can't catch them all. Minor shoplifting is easy to do but still the number of shoplifters is far smaller than the number of legit customers. Yes, even minor shoplifting carries a higher risk of being caught than piracy, but I still think it goes to show that most people aren't immediately going to commit a crime if they know they'd get away with it.
Finally, even if the publisher didn't believe there were honest people out there, why go for modern more restrictive DRM over old CD checks? Here you have easily available numbers showing that more restrictive DRM doesn't decrease piracy, Spore isn't getting pirated any less than, I dunno, Starcraft.
quote:
I would argue that the most of the alleged "pain" from Spore's DRM are actually very trivial when it comes to your average gamer. The only DRM that I can see being a problem to your everyday average gamer is the three-install limit. |
Agreed, the installation limit is the part I find to be problematic. I think that limiting the number of times you can install the game crosses the line of acceptable protection. As said in my previous post, I can understand the need to include some measure of protection (though again, I vastly prefer it done like Valve does it), but limited installs are too much of a restriction.
|
|
| |
|
|
Wiglaf
|
|
 |
| |
|
|
