PC Gaming: Copy protection is getting ridicilous

[FatCobra]

Seriously, are they trying to kill this platform off so they can focus on the more profitable consoles? I mean, first there was Starforce, which installed hidden drivers that conflicted with your system and could kill your DVD drive by making it run in a mode it was not designed for. Not to mention it blacklisted CD burning and emulation tools like Nero and Daemon tools. Yes, those programs can cause piracy, but what if I just want to back my game disc up and use an image for when I can't be arsed to go find the CD/DVD, even though I installed pretty much all of the data on my hard drive? I avoided all Starforced games simply on the principle that a game should not fuck up my hardware.

Then Bioshock opened up a whole another can of worms:
LIMITED INSTALLS!!!

Seriously, whoever thought of that needs to have his balls hacked off with a rusty saw. How this new DRM scheme ever get approved is beyond all comprehension. Basically, the idea is that you can only install it to three or so computers before the disc becomes a coaster. Sound fair in theory, but there's a huge flaw in this scheme: computers can be upgraded, crash, or be reformatted. Basically, this scheme bases a "token" on your current hardware setup, a unique key that can be changed by changing hardware or reformatting. This spells doom for system builders, because they aren't on the same "computer" for very long, even if it's the same machine, but with more RAM and a new videocard.

"Do you get an install back if you uninstall the game?" Depends on the publisher. 2K, the publishers of Bioshock, has a tool where you can "revoke" an installation after uninstalling. It won't do you any good if you forget to uninstall the game and use the tool before reformatting or upgrading your machine. People have gotten locked out of their games just trying to get the game to work.

EA Games are now using this from of protection on all their future games, starting with Mass Effect and Spore, with no indication of getting installs back. As soon as I heard that, those two games fell off my "want badly" radar. I'm not paying $50 for a glorified rental and a coaster. And since they are using this in their future, I am boycotting EA until they start using some common sense (by then, the universe would have probably ended)

They say this crap is supposed to fight piracy, but all it is doing is punishing legitimate, paying customers, while the pirates just laugh at them and get a hassle-free, fully-working, FREE version.

It's ridiculous, really, and now I take a risk when I want to try a new PC game. Do I pay and have hidden drivers, rookits, and whatnot installed along with it that could prevent me from playing a game I PAID FOR, or torrent a pirate version that a least lets me play it without hassle, but also have viruses on it? At least the pirate-version is free and the viruses are probably less harmful than the DRMed retail version.

I pirate games (who doesn't these days, and downloading MAME roms is piracy, so most of use here are guilty) ,but I feel dirty if I download a game, especially if it's good and worth paying money for. I believe in rewarding developers in making something awesome, plus I value the game more knowing I forked over money for it. But this DRM has changed my morals. I'm not rewarding this kind of behavior where the customer gets screwed in the ass.

Want to treat me like a criminal? Fine, I'll act like one, just without giving you any money. I have no syphamy for publishers who punish paying customers. That's just a bad business model, don't you think?

Has copy protection screwed you over? Hasn't happened to me yet, but hearing about this kind of stuff drives me batshit insane.

One thing to mention: 2K recently got rid of the limited installs for Bioshock, so score one for the gamers! I still think it's a case of too little too late, however........

[gavin19]

One thing to mention: 2K recently got rid of the limited installs for Bioshock, so score one for the gamers! I still think it's a case of too little too late, however........

I think that was due to a year having lapsed since release. I believe that's the general policy with these 'limited install' games. Once a certain time frame has passed, and the game has sold the majority of the copies it is expected to, then the limits are lifted. I may be wrong of course.

[Pixel_Outlaw]

The whole problem with the current industry is that they are fueled by yuppies who move from old to new platforms only never to play the old systems again.

This comes in the form of limited installs (as you have said) and also games which play only on-line. I plan to play my current games in 5 years because I take care of my property. Now how many modern games will be playable when the crowd of yuppies moves on?

[Ed Oscuro]

A lot of the Gothic III discs in the Gothic Universe pack have a problem from a CRC mismatch (possibly protection related). My disc had this problem actually (was still able to install but it might be messing up some things).

I had been feeling good about using Alcohol 52% because it wasn't Daemon Fools - but you still gotta install iSCSI and it doesn't support many common disc types anyway. SO IT'S USELESS for many web ISOs.

Starforce, I think, was the pits. Nearly a rootkit, ffs.

On Bioshock, I recall reading that they'd lift them ages ago. They're just following up with what they promised long ago. They know that the semi-dedicated pirates will just wait until it's possible to pirate, and not be likely to purchase - they're just hoping that this dissuades enough pirates from pirating and hopefully get them to decide that it's less hassle to actually buy the game.

[FatCobra]

Now how many modern games will be playable when the crowd of yuppies moves on?

Simple, the pirates crack the protections, preserving the games in the process. I doubt anyone's gonna throw a fit over a game that's five+ years old.

Without "the scene," many games would fade into obscurity, never to be played again. Software can last forever because it can be copied. Hardware eventually wears out. An NES may be built to last a hundred years, but eventually it'll no longer work.

Emulation and piracy preserves videogame history for future generations. Anyone with a love for gaming and common sense would know that.

Copy protection just doesn't work, it'll get cracked sooner or later. Why do they bother? To prevent day-one piracy, at the expense of the customers? Bullshit. When will they learn? Don't worry about the pirates and make the game worth paying for. Stardock (makers of Sins of a Solar Empire and Galatic Civilizations) understands that. Valve gets it to a certain degree, Steam is nice but has its problem too.

Copy protection is just part of the pc gaming culture. I'm old enough to remember having to type in Word X at Line Y. I didn't mind that kind of stuff because it encouraged you to read the manual. Bard's Tale III had a code wheel you needed to use if you wanted to progress. Requiring the disc in the drive, by compraision, was a luxury.

Blame the pirates, it's their fault, right? Perhaps, if there was no "scene," then we wouldn't have this crap that we have today.

Copy protection has never gotten this bad however, most of the time it was just annoying. Requiring the disc was only annoying if you have gaming ADD like I do and like to switch games often. Of course I get more annoyed at it when the game installed 5GBs worth of crap and I still need the disk, but that was when I didn't knew about copy protection. A quick crack (after backing up the EXE file in case of patching) usually fixed the problem however.

But limited installs really grinds my gears. Did they not do the research? Are they that out of touch with reality? Are they just being greedy? I think that's answer.

You know those EULAS that everyone never bothers to read when they install a game? Read them more closely. According to them, you don't actually own the game you bought. You own a "license" to use it, and they can revoke that right to use it. I guess limited installs is their way of actually enforcing it.

This is bullshit of course. License to use my ass. When I pay for something, IT'S MINE! If I buy a CD, I have a right to copy and convert it into different formats. If I want to burn a copy for my car, and my stereo so I don't scratch my original, then that's my business.

Revoke my right to play my game huh? Well, I'll revoke your rights to my money! Sounds fair right?

I suggest you guys research the copy protection for any future pc games you guys might be buying. And don't pirate them if you like the game but hate the protection, just don't buy them! And for those who "Buy N Crack," what kind of message are you sending? You're willing to put up with these draconian measures, but you're also a pirate? Speak with your wallets!

It's a vicious cycle really, the DRM is too restrictive so gamers either pirate, not buy, or crack it. They blame the low sales on piracy, so they lock them down even tighter.

As Princess Leia once said: "The more you tighten your grip, the more will slip out your grasp." Or something like that, haven't seen Star Wars in a while.

[Damocles]

...and all this based on the shifty assumption that a pirate will buy all the games if he can't pirate them.

The amusing part is that anti-piracy devices don't phase pirates and only piss off legit users.

[FatCobra]

...and all this based on the shifty assumption that a pirate will buy all the games if he can't pirate them.

The amusing part is that anti-piracy devices don't phase pirates and only piss off legit users.

Exactly. So why do they bother?
Not all pirates just download games for the heck of it. Perhaps one just wants to see if the game will run on his machine and the demo wasn't enough to judge if the game was worth the money or not? Piracy can actually help sales, by spreading the game out to more people. Whether they will buy them or not is another matter. You can't rent PC games anymore. Even Gamestop doesn't take trade-ins for pc games anymore, due to the mess that is copy protection.

Either way, copy protection that turns $50 game disks into expensive coasters is not cool.

At least I have another reason to boycott EA.

[Ruldra]

You forgot to mention that Mass Effect, when it was lauched, had SecuROM protection. It would connect to the internet from time to time to verify if your copy was legit. But Mass Effect is a single-player game.

So, if you wanted to play a single-player game, you are forced to have internet connection. Seriously, WTF?

Penny Arcade made a comic about this, by the way.

Now, I've never been interested in Mass Effect, but I feel sorry for all the people who need to put up with this crap. It just makes them ditch the original product and get the pirate version (which in turn will induce MORE copy protection...lol).

[FatCobra]

You forgot to mention that Mass Effect, when it was lauched, had SecuROM protection. It would connect to the internet from time to time to verify if your copy was legit. But Mass Effect is a single-player game.

Yeah, requiring the internet to play a single player game is messed up, but it's not a huge problem since almost every computer is connected to the internet some way. Yes, the connection goes down from time to time, but that's life!

I completely forget about the net requirement just because I think the limited installs is the bigger issue here.

[SAM]

You forgot to mention that Mass Effect, when it was lauched, had SecuROM protection. It would connect to the internet from time to time to verify if your copy was legit. But Mass Effect is a single-player game.

Yeah, requiring the internet to play a single player game is messed up, but it's not a huge problem since almost every computer is connected to the internet some way. Yes, the connection goes down from time to time, but that's life!

I completely forget about the net requirement just because I think the limited installs is the bigger issue here.

I think requring you to have an active internet connection is the lesser of two evils.

I rather to have the game run smoothly, with trouble free installation, and won't damage your PC's hardware. An active internet connection is a small price to pay.

[worstplayer]

Mass Effect is nothing compared to Assassins's Creed.
That game phones home every 30 seconds or so.
If they put as much effort into writing decent port as they did into stuffing it with as much DRM bullshit as possible, it could actually been playable

(AC is easily worst port since Atari2600 days. You can't fucking play it on normal TV! You need widescreen. Quitting game takes more than 2 minutes (unless you use CTRL-ALT-DEL). Keyboard & mouse controls are so bad they HAD to be crippled on purpose, and it doesn't correctly recognize Xbox360 gamepad even thought it's a port from Xbox360. Oh and it has higher HW requirements than Crysis. It fucking sucks, stay away from it.)

[Ed Oscuro]

[Assassin's Creed] has higher HW requirements than Crysis.

That seems bizarre, but consider that AC is a port of a game from a console with set specs, whereas Crysis was made to run on a range of systems (even if only really badly). That probably sets the baseline configuration you'd need.

Sounds like all the complaints people threw at Halo's PC port. Remember how high the requirements were for that?

[benstylus]

And don't pirate them if you like the game but hate the protection, just don't buy them!

Bingo.

When you pirate a game, the publishers get to say "SEE? WE KNEW WE COULDN'T TRUST YOU!" and it legitimizes the industry's reliance on copy protection. The "Treat me like a criminal and I'll be a criminal" mentality does not work. It only makes the publishers more reliant on copy protection, and the piracy numbers can help push other publishers to use copy protection where they may not have previously.

There are PLENTY of fantastic games out there to play, and even if only 10% of them didn't have overbearing copy protection schemes, that would still be more games than most people would have time to play in their lifetime.

There are very few truly "must-play" game experiences (I'd actually go so far as to say there probably aren't ANY) where you can't find a similar amount of enjoyment with another game that isn't locked down.

If you really dislike this hard-nosed type of copy protection, don't buy AND DON'T PLAY the games that have it, send letters to the publishers saying you're not buying their game because of the copy protection, and most importantly DO buy the good games that don't have protection.

[Mortificator]

So, if you wanted to play a single-player game, you are forced to have internet connection. Seriously, WTF?

Penny Arcade made a comic about this, by the way.

The funny thing is, Penny Arcade's own game needs online activation and has limited installs.

[Michaelm]

And don't pirate them if you like the game but hate the protection, just don't buy them!

Bingo.

When you pirate a game, the publishers get to say "SEE? WE KNEW WE COULDN'T TRUST YOU!" and it legitimizes the industry's reliance on copy protection.

Hmm, so Big Brother is in effect already ?!?
How else would they know I've pirated a game ?

This whole copy protection issue is more psychological then anything else.
It only works if enough people are led to believe that copy protection is there for them. It thrives on the very old classes syndrome. The good class and the bad class. Those stupid enough start to believe they belong to the good class and therefore they can say bad things about the bad class. But in reality there is no good class, only butt lickers of the industry.
It has nothing to do with good or bad. If anything the industry is just bad.

Especially with everything that has to do with computers.
The publishers thought they could get rich without doing the work.
Work is done once but they thought they could charge until the end of times. There it is were it all went wrong.
Almost the same as the music industry were the same philosophy applies.

It's all very straightforward and extremely simple.
Copy protection is there to LIMIT your rights so therefore it can NOT be good.
Still not convinced ?!?
They sell YOU discs with copy protection cause they think YOU are a criminal.

Now we can all go on whining by saying copy protection came after piracy but is that really so ?
They can put in copy protection that requires you to plug into the moon but eventually that will be cracked too. Just like everything else will that runs on a computer.
So in the end copy protection only annoys legitimate buyers.
Makes you wonder why there still are so many of them actually.

[FatCobra]

And don't pirate them if you like the game but hate the protection, just don't buy them!

Bingo.

When you pirate a game, the publishers get to say "SEE? WE KNEW WE COULDN'T TRUST YOU!" and it legitimizes the industry's reliance on copy protection.

Hmm, so Big Brother is in effect already ?!?
How else would they know I've pirated a game ?

They don't, actually. If enough people tell other people not to buy the game due to asinine copy protection, then the publishers will just blame the low sales on piracy and enforce even harsher protection. Piracy is just a scapegoat.

[Stormwatch]

So, if you wanted to play a single-player game, you are forced to have internet connection. Seriously, WTF?

Penny Arcade made a comic about this, by the way.

The funny thing is, Penny Arcade's own game needs online activation and has limited installs.

Great! This way I won't feel guilty for pirating it.

[SAM]

By the way, some people buy games just for their copy protect. A friend of mine love to break copy protect for amusement.

If games don't have copy protect, this kind of people would probaby lost interest in PC gaming.

He once said "PC games nowadays is unplayable without breaking the copy protect."

[benstylus]

Hmm, so Big Brother is in effect already ?!?
How else would they know I've pirated a game ?

They don't, actually.

They DO, actually.

While it's true that they don't know each and every person who pirates a game, but it doesn't take any magical marketing formulas, big brother spying, or anything of the sort to find out whether and how pervasive piracy of a particular game is.

All it takes is knowing what a google and a bittorrent are. There are tons of torrent sites out there that proudly list most popular, number of downloads, number of active downloads, etc.

Piracy was a lot easier to tolerate when people weren't so flagrant and unabashedly proud of it.

Now we can all go on whining by saying copy protection came after piracy but is that really so ?

Of course it is.

Stealing has been around his the dawn of time.

You can't honestly think that locks were invented as a pre-emptive strike in case someone would eventually think to steal something...

[Ex-Cyber]

This sort of thing seems to go in cycles. Companies try it, eventually figure out that it's a waste of their time/money, and back off to using basic schemes like serial numbers/CD keys (which are still bullshit, but at least not so invasive). 10 years or so later someone says "hey, I've got this great idea..." and the cycle starts again. I think the big problem today is that the people with the power to impose this sort of thing are publishing execs who don't actually understand the surrounding issues. Back in the 8-bit days, copy protection was more often than not unique to each game/app, coded by the programmer(s) for it; nowadays copy protection is a cookie-cutter "solution" marketed by companies like Macrovision to other companies. In any case, though, it can be painful when someone imposes this stuff without thinking about the consequences. Probably my favorite example of "copy protection" is modchip checks on PlayStation games; these checks only care whether there's a mod, not whether the copy is authorized, so if you buy the game you can't play it, but if you download a cracked copy you can play it. Yeah, I'm sure that had exactly the intended effect...

[FatCobra]

I think the big problem today is that the people with the power to impose this sort of thing are publishing execs who don't actually understand the surrounding issues.

Bingo, I think that's what's going on. They are not gamers, so they really out of touch of reality. They have no idea how things really work and only think about the bottomline.

[Frederik]

They say this crap is supposed to fight piracy, but all it is doing is punishing legitimate, paying customers, while the pirates just laugh at them and get a hassle-free, fully-working, FREE version.

This, to me, is the strongest argument against these protection methods. When people pay hard cash for overpriced games they should have the most comfort they can get - and not be swamped with restrictions.

[moonblood]

Years ago I saw some program that came on a disc with a specifically drilled hole in it and of course the thing wouldn't run without it, I thought that was pretty clever. Don't know if they ever cracked that but I'm sure they found some way...

[Damocles]

Think of how much copy protection costs to develop. Now think about how much of that is transfered to you.

[Michaelm]

Now we can all go on whining by saying copy protection came after piracy but is that really so ?

Of course it is.

Stealing has been around his the dawn of time.

You can't honestly think that locks were invented as a pre-emptive strike in case someone would eventually think to steal something...

What has stealing to do with pirating software ? Really ! It's incomparable !
The gaming industry thanks its ongoing existence to piracy.
It would have never gotten off without piracy in the first place.
Now piracy only causes them to miss a bit of extra income but they are not hurt in the way someone usually is when things actually get stolen.
In fact they are the ones that keep on stealing from their legitimate customer as they have done over the years where you now only get a CD or a DVD when you used to get all sorts of stuff to accompany the game.

[benstylus]

What has stealing to do with pirating software ? Really ! It's incomparable !

Not at all - it was an analogy.

Stealing was the reason locks were invented.
Piracy was the reason copy protection was invented.

It's not a chicken or egg argument, it's quite clear cut. One most certainly preceded the other.

The gaming industry thanks its ongoing existence to piracy.
It would have never gotten off without piracy in the first place.

Unless you can give me some legitimate information to help back up this claim, i'm gonna have to call it out as absolute rubbish.

Are you saying that pirated games caused awareness to grow and the increased publicity caused people to massively go out and buy legit copies of that game?

I can reasonably see that maybe happening for a select few games, but I highly doubt it would have been widespread enough to have saved a single company, let alone the whole gaming industry from destruction as you are claiming.

In fact they are the ones that keep on stealing from their legitimate customer as they have done over the years where you now only get a CD or a DVD when you used to get all sorts of stuff to accompany the game.

You've just jumped the shark with this comment.

What was the price of a computer game 10 years ago? In the US, it was usually around $40 to $50.

Inflation has caused the prices of most things to increase by approximately 32% (from Jan 97 through Dec 07) since then.

Additionally, the cost to develop games has also skyrocketed due to the increased size and resolutions.

So, what do computer games cost today? Still usually around $40 or $50.

Cutting costs by reducing extra stuff like cloth maps and figures is the reason they can sell them at that price. And if you want the figures and maps and such, many big name games have collector's editions with all that crap, and they cost $10 to $20 more... which coincidentially lines up right about where the inflation curve would price games if they went up at the same rate everything else did.

[kengou]

Steam is the answer to copy protection. Usually, if I can't get a game from Steam, I'll pirate it, but if it's on there, I'll buy it. It's really convenient, and it doesn't drill your computer with copy protection. It only requires an internet connection to install the game, and that's it. It's really painless.

In my opinion copy protection has more of an impact on sales than piracy does. Often, someone who pirates a game wouldn't actually buy it if they couldn't pirate it. Also, many people don't buy as many games because of the copy protection. It only annoys legitimate users, and copy protection is always (ALWAYS) broken within a day or two of the game being released. It's really useless.

[Ruldra]

Which is why I think piracy is the way to go, really. Getting the pirate version is your way to give them the finger and say no to all of that copy protection crap.

Sure, it'll lead to more protection from developers, but with time they'll realize it won't stop piracy at all AND it's hurting their sales (the longer it takes for them to see this, the more money they lose).

In the end, they'll ditch copy protection entirely, or come up with less invasive protection methods (e.g. Steam, CD Keys).

[Michaelm]

What was the price of a computer game 10 years ago? In the US, it was usually around $40 to $50.

Hmm, I thought it was 80 to 100 Dutch Guilders. Not sure though.
That's about 37 to 45 Euro.

Inflation has caused the prices of most things to increase by approximately 32% (from Jan 97 through Dec 07) since then.
Additionally, the cost to develop games has also skyrocketed due to the increased size and resolutions.

So, what do computer games cost today? Still usually around $40 or $50.

Around 50 to 70 Euro I believe.

Cutting costs by reducing extra stuff like cloth maps and figures is the reason they can sell them at that price. And if you want the figures and maps and such, many big name games have collector's editions with all that crap, and they cost $10 to $20 more... which coincidentially lines up right about where the inflation curve would price games if they went up at the same rate everything else did.

Not over here it did.

Also, there are countries now where people cannot even afford to buy food anymore as it has grown so expensive.
Develop a protection against that !

[benstylus]

What was the price of a computer game 10 years ago? In the US, it was usually around $40 to $50.

Hmm, I thought it was 80 to 100 Dutch Guilders. Not sure though.
That's about 37 to 45 Euro.

i'm looking on amazon.de (since I don't know of any other european shops and I can read german, so I know where to look there) and most of the new release stuff is in the 40 to 50 euro range... practically the only stuff above 50 are the limited editions.

Also, there are countries now where people cannot even afford to buy food anymore as it has grown so expensive.
Develop a protection against that !

*face palm*

wow. just... wow.