BioShock 2 PC Requirements, DRM Revealed

[Maximilian]

O RLY?

I'm not sure why people fuss so much. I have NEVER ran into a install limit problem..and If I did (I can see why a 3 install limit could be annoying) all I'd have to do is call the customer support number.

DRM does accomplish really nothing...but is it really that big of a nuisance to honest people?

Yes, yes it is. Earth 2160 had DRM, it was released in 2005. I cant play it anymore because the activation servers are gone and the phone number is no longer in use, also emailing the company with a photo of your disc, the numbers on the disc, the back of the manual with the cd key isnt enough apparently and they wanted more proof in the form of some downloaded thing where i had to do somthing or other and then reinstall the game etc blah blah.... I told them to shove it. Lousy game anyway compared to its predecessor. Ever since then ive been smart and avoided DRM games.

We PC gamers have enough BS to deal with to get games to run in the first place, never mind all that added garbage. Ill bet if i did go through all that hassle with 2160 it wouldnt run on vista/7 anyway. Wouldve been a total waste of time.

 

[Cogman]

How on earth does an "install limit" stop piracy... It's ridiculous.

 

[toyota]

How on earth does an "install limit" stop piracy... It's ridiculous.

I dont get that either.

as for GFWL I havent had a prob with it in the last couple years. back when Gears of War came out though it was a nightmare and caused crashing and screwed up my saves.

 

[Gothgar]

GFWL... oh god

dont tell me, they are also using Gamespy comrade right?

Just to completely break it all

 

[dguy6789]

How on earth does an "install limit" stop piracy... It's ridiculous.

The purpose of the install limit is to make consumers less likely to resell their game and to make people less likely to buy a used game. It is of course under the guise of fighting piracy, but as you guys have noticed, that doesn't make sense.

 

[minmaster]

another game that will be 1-2 stars on amazon i bet.

 

[quadomatic]

another game that will be 1-2 stars on amazon i bet.

For no good reason. Anyone who has actually purchased the game probably has come to terms with DRM. The people writing those reviews probably never purchased the game.

 

[Maximilian]

For no good reason. Anyone who has actually purchased the game probably has come to terms with DRM. The people writing those reviews probably never purchased the game.

What so being informative is a bad reason hmm? People cant inform others how crap somthing is unless they buy it themselves, even though they know through reliable sources or past experience that said product is in fact shit. Great logic man

 

[quadomatic]

What so being informative is a bad reason hmm? People cant inform others how crap somthing is unless they buy it themselves, even though they know through reliable sources or past experience that said product is in fact shit. Great logic man

What might those reliable sources be? TorrentFreak is not a reliable source on how DRM is bad. Neither is an internet forum, since obviously, the only people posting are people with problems.

I've been BUYING games with SecuROM and TAGES, and have played them on more than one set of hardware, and I've yet to have any problems that have prevented me from playing games.

Yes, DRM CAN be annoying for some, but the problems are generally minor at best, and can be solved. But for most, it barely affects the experience.

I suggest you move past the hype and read this, as it discusses DRM. You may find it enlightening:

http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_8.html

 

[Maximilian]

What might those reliable sources be? TorrentFreak is not a reliable source on how DRM is bad. Neither is an internet forum, since obviously, the only people posting are people with problems.

I've been BUYING games with SecuROM and TAGES, and have played them on more than one set of hardware, and I've yet to have any problems that have prevented me from playing games.

Yes, DRM CAN be annoying for some, but the problems are generally minor at best, and can be solved. But for most, it barely affects the experience.

I suggest you move past the hype and read this, as it discusses DRM. You may find it enlightening:

http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_8.html

Right so you have no problem with DRM which means noone else will have any problems? Heh sure...

Guess thats why some devs are denouncing DRM and others are removing it from their games after a few months, because its working perfectly and few people have issues with it

 

[Cogman]

What might those reliable sources be? TorrentFreak is not a reliable source on how DRM is bad. Neither is an internet forum, since obviously, the only people posting are people with problems.

I've been BUYING games with SecuROM and TAGES, and have played them on more than one set of hardware, and I've yet to have any problems that have prevented me from playing games.

Yes, DRM CAN be annoying for some, but the problems are generally minor at best, and can be solved. But for most, it barely affects the experience.

I suggest you move past the hype and read this, as it discusses DRM. You may find it enlightening:

http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_8.html

Wow, its good to see how retarded software developers can be.
1. He draws a VERY poor analogy to house keys and DRM. They aren't the same thing, not even close. Yes, a professional criminal can break into your house in less then 5 mins, but not everyone is a professional criminal. Not only that, but one pro breaking-in in five minuets doesn't mean that everyone else can just walk in after that. With software, it does. It only takes one really good cracker for software to be distributed to everyone, and anyone pro or not can use the software. BIG difference.

2. He keeps saying that there are huge sales losses when a game is first pirated, yet, he doesn't cite any sort of source for that (Oh, except for a steam sponsored blurb about why steam is the best thing since sliced bread). 1 pirated game does not equal 1 lost sale. period. He cited that Prince of Persia had over 20,000 downloaders the first day that it was released, big whoop, several other DRMed games have had much higher download rates, regardless of weather it was day 1 or day 18, the rates of piracy for a popular game are about the same.

3. He cites Demigod being a game that is mostly made up of pirates but a wonderful game that would have done so much better had it had oggles of DRM, and then goes on the blame piracy for the fact that the game sucks. No really, he blames piracy for the fact that the game gets negative reviews. Um, yeah, if the game sucks, sales are going to be low. I play a lot of online games that I would never spend a lent cent for. Does that mean they are awesome? No, it means they are free and something I can waste a few minutes playing.

4. And finally, How does an installation limit prevent piracy? Anyone? Anyone? Most DRM methods, I'm actually OK with, but what about the installation limit? It is something that artificially puts a shelf life on something that has no shelf life. It kills second hand markets. And it adds headaches to legitimate users. And how does it prevent piracy? Answer: It doesn't. It is JUST as effective as a regular DRM method, which, once broken is useless. Pirates don't care about install limits, they remove them. So who ever gets to see them? ONLY legitimate customers will EVER see an installation limit enforced. They blame piracy for it, but it has nothing to do with it, greed has everything to do with it.

 

[quadomatic]

Wow, its good to see how retarded software developers can be.
1. He draws a VERY poor analogy to house keys and DRM. They aren't the same thing, not even close. Yes, a professional criminal can break into your house in less then 5 mins, but not everyone is a professional criminal. Not only that, but one pro breaking-in in five minuets doesn't mean that everyone else can just walk in after that. With software, it does. It only takes one really good cracker for software to be distributed to everyone, and anyone pro or not can use the software. BIG difference.

The point is that the longer it takes for someone to crack DRM, the better. The analogy there is between 0-day releases of cracked games, versus a week after.

If the DRM protection is good enough to keep the game off of torrents for say, a couple days after release (or at least until after the game is released), then it's better for sales.

It's not about keeping people cracks unusable permanently, it's about keeping cracks unavailable for enough days/weeks after the release date to encourage more people to buy instead of pirating.

2. He keeps saying that there are huge sales losses when a game is first pirated, yet, he doesn't cite any sort of source for that (Oh, except for a steam sponsored blurb about why steam is the best thing since sliced bread). 1 pirated game does not equal 1 lost sale. period. He cited that Prince of Persia had over 20,000 downloaders the first day that it was released, big whoop, several other DRMed games have had much higher download rates, regardless of weather it was day 1 or day 18, the rates of piracy for a popular game are about the same.

Yeah, while it's true that one pirated game does not equal one lost sale, that doesn't mean that there aren't a ton of people pirating a game that would've bought it otherwise. For example, he gave an example of World of Goo. That game was really cheap, but it had a 90% piracy rate. A large number of people would've shelled out the $15 for that game if they couldn't pirate it.

3. He cites Demigod being a game that is mostly made up of pirates but a wonderful game that would have done so much better had it had oggles of DRM, and then goes on the blame piracy for the fact that the game sucks. No really, he blames piracy for the fact that the game gets negative reviews. Um, yeah, if the game sucks, sales are going to be low. I play a lot of online games that I would never spend a lent cent for. Does that mean they are awesome? No, it means they are free and something I can waste a few minutes playing.

The game got negative reviews because there were problems with playing online, which happened because 100,000 pirates (out of 120,000 users, leaving only 20,000 legit users) hammered the servers.

4. And finally, How does an installation limit prevent piracy? Anyone? Anyone? Most DRM methods, I'm actually OK with, but what about the installation limit? It is something that artificially puts a shelf life on something that has no shelf life. It kills second hand markets. And it adds headaches to legitimate users. And how does it prevent piracy? Answer: It doesn't. It is JUST as effective as a regular DRM method, which, once broken is useless. Pirates don't care about install limits, they remove them. So who ever gets to see them? ONLY legitimate customers will EVER see an installation limit enforced. They blame piracy for it, but it has nothing to do with it, greed has everything to do with it.

This one, I'm more inclined to agree with. I can understand online activations, but activation limits don't make a whole lot of sense...a simple disc check should suffice if you want to keep people from sharing the game with friends.

Overall though, you seem to not have properly read any of that article, but just looked for random tidbits without knowing a damn thing about what you're talking about.

 

[Cogman]

The point is that the longer it takes for someone to crack DRM, the better. The analogy there is between 0-day releases of cracked games, versus a week after.

If the DRM protection is good enough to keep the game off of torrents for say, a couple days after release (or at least until after the game is released), then it's better for sales.

It's not about keeping people cracks unusable permanently, it's about keeping cracks unavailable for enough days/weeks after the release date to encourage more people to buy instead of pirating.

Understandable, I just feel that total sales are only marginally affected by piracy. The thing is, DRM can hurt sales through negative publicity. Spore is a perfect example (even mentioned in the article). People don't want install limits (which, perhaps unfairly gets lumped into the DRM category). That was destructive to spore's sales. It doesn't matter what you or I think about DRM, the fact is, a strong DRM generates negative publicity which can really harm the sales of any game.

Yeah, while it's true that one pirated game does not equal one lost sale, that doesn't mean that there aren't a ton of people pirating a game that would've bought it otherwise. For example, he gave an example of World of Goo. That game was really cheap, but it had a 90% piracy rate. A large number of people would've shelled out the $15 for that game if they couldn't pirate it.

Um.. And you accuse me of not reading the article. World of Goo was NEVER mentioned in it... I don't know if "a large number" is accurate. I do believe that there where/are lost sales, but I don't believe it to the extent that DRM manufactures are proclaiming.

The game got negative reviews because there were problems with playing online, which happened because 100,000 pirates (out of 120,000 users, leaving only 20,000 legit users) hammered the servers.

No, you didn't do your research on this one. Demigod is peer-to-peer based networking, meaning, no centralized servers. So there is no "hammering the servers". More players = more servers. http://pc.ign.com/articles/974/974110p2.html Demigod suffered from poorly written netcode.

Overall though, you seem to not have properly read any of that article, but just looked for random tidbits without knowing a damn thing about what you're talking about.

Given the fact that you don't even know what is in the article you posted, I find it ironic that you accuse me of not knowing what I'm talking about.

I don't know how I'm coming off, but I actually don't have a lot of contempt for most DRM systems. So long as they are unobtrusive, I could care less what they are doing. However, the DRM that I can't stand is install limits (I think I've been pretty clear on that). Piracy is the industry scape goat to put whatever crap they like into a game.

I'm a bit more skeptical about online verification, I'm not a huge fan of it, but its at least tolerable (the biggest downside being that servers don't last forever, again, putting an artificial shelf life on something that has no shelf life). I look at a game like starcraft, which I still will play every so often (and yes, it is legitimate), if it conformed to today's DRM standards, there is no way that I would be playing it today. I've installed it on all my new computer build (and I've had several), and I doubt blizzard would run starcraft activation servers when they release starcraft 2. Its almost as if manufactures are saying "Hey, we don't really want our games to be classics."

 

[Zenoth]

I had never really experienced GFWL first hand, well in fact I never did, until I bought Dawn of War II very recently (only a week ago), it depends on GFWL in multi-player, and even though I usually prefer to describe things better than with just such words I will say it now since I cannot describe GFWL any better than that it completely sucks. There is such a lack of features to have control over our account and friends (and enemies) that it makes me wonder exactly what type of persons were hired to create it, if those guys ever played a game on-line at all in their life.

It's troubling to force people to use such a crappy program, and in DoW II's case, to add insult to injury the match-making system, if it can even be called as such, is just as worse as the one in Borderlands, and that's saying something. Now I that I am logging in GFWL and accessing it regularly via DoW II and now that I know how "bad" it really is I am seriously contemplating on never buying any other games again that requires it for either the single-player or the multi-player component of a game, or for anything else, and it certainly includes Bioshock 2.

But I must admit one thing, is that the original Bioshock wasn't that mind-blowing. It had good moments, good dialog, dark humor, interesting A.I (sometimes, mind you) and some good enemies, a great environment to look at, I mean generally speaking, and on an artistic point of view it was good, but eventually I still got bored of it and never installed it again after completing it one time, when I was done with it I un-installed it, then later I formatted, got a new OS and never thought of re-installing it again, and right now I don't miss it nor do I have any desire of playing it again.

Despite GFWL and despite the disappointment (somewhat) of the original I might still get it at the end of this year when the 2010 Holiday Sale will occur, or if there's any other special deals until then, but I will not buy it at its full price, or even at half its price, I'll wait. And I have so many other games to look for this year other than Bioshock 2 it's not even funny.

 

[Attic]

ugh, I can't stand GFWL.

Play a game that uses GFLW is like sitting down to eat a delicious meal and then finding a booger on your sliverware. All of a sudden the meal doesn't look so good anymore and you may have lost your appetite alltogether.

GFWL is terrible. I hate the achievement system that is being included in more and more games even more though. Is it fun to have random messages popup "rewarding" the gamer for just playing the damned game? Jesus, most of the time I see an achievement pop up it breaks the immersion of the game and I don't have any idea what I did in the first place to get the achievement. God I wish I could turn that crap off in games. Achievements were, by far, my biggest gripe in Dragon Age. It was a countless number of times that I would have no idea what the achievment corresponded to (I think I got one for killing 3 enemies with one spell?...i feel like a little kid being patted on the head with that crap) I really wish games didn't have so much stupid injected into them lately.

 

[Tsavo]

They are just BEGGING to have their game ripped off.

Arkham Asylum took longer to install and patch both the game and GFWL than it took to install and patch Windows 7.

 

[SantaAna12]

Nope. I didnt buy additional content from Bethesda causa this, and I aint bitin on Bio2, as much as I liked the original. Stay away from mah gaming Bill!

 

[mindcycle]

The point is that the longer it takes for someone to crack DRM, the better. The analogy there is between 0-day releases of cracked games, versus a week after.

If the DRM protection is good enough to keep the game off of torrents for say, a couple days after release (or at least until after the game is released), then it's better for sales.

It's not about keeping people cracks unusable permanently, it's about keeping cracks unavailable for enough days/weeks after the release date to encourage more people to buy instead of pirating.

I agree that the longer the game is uncracked the better. Whether or not that situation actually equates to more sales is debatable, but the potential is definitely there.

The problem is that most games, i'd say 90% or more, are cracked day one or even before the release date. In those cases the DRM is largely ineffective and the money the publisher spent on said DRM is basically money wasted. IMO it would be best to go with minimal DRM and spend the money saved on additional features since that's a much better method of increasing sales. More incentives to buy, not more roadblocks.

 

[ShawnD1]

Arkham Asylum took longer to install and patch both the game and GFWL than it took to install and patch Windows 7.

This is pathetic. GTA 4 had a similar amount of bullshit to deal with and it ruins the game. Download game, sign up for Rockstar, sign up for GWFL, link the two accounts which are then linked to my Steam account. Try to run the game, it doesn't work. Figure out why it's fucked. Spend 2 days on the Steam forum reading about how to get around "startup.exe has stopped working" which we know for a fact is a DRM problem (startup.exe is a DRM launcher). Once the game is finally working, it deletes my fucking save games so the game is basically unplayable. I can't even sell the thing second hand because it's linked to me in 3 different ways.

"Piracy kills sales!!"
No, making shitty unplayable games kills sales. I won't even buy a game unless it's been out for a few months and I'm absolutely certain the game can be cracked when the DRM starts to fuck around. I didn't say if because it's almost a given that it won't work out of the box.

 

[smackababy]

This is pathetic. GTA 4 had a similar amount of bullshit to deal with and it ruins the game. Download game, sign up for Rockstar, sign up for GWFL, link the two accounts which are then linked to my Steam account. Try to run the game, it doesn't work. Figure out why it's fucked. Spend 2 days on the Steam forum reading about how to get around "startup.exe has stopped working" which we know for a fact is a DRM problem (startup.exe is a DRM launcher). Once the game is finally working, it deletes my fucking save games so the game is basically unplayable. I can't even sell the thing second hand because it's linked to me in 3 different ways.

"Piracy kills sales!!"
No, making shitty unplayable games kills sales. I won't even buy a game unless it's been out for a few months and I'm absolutely certain the game can be cracked when the DRM starts to fuck around. I didn't say if because it's almost a given that it won't work out of the box.

Now when paying customers have to rely on pirates to make their games playable, you know DRM is out of control.

 

[mindcycle]

*UPDATE 1/25*

BioShock 2 publisher 2K Games is "scaling back" its DRM restrictions on PC, community manager Elizabeth Tobey has explained, potentially spelling the end of the scandal that may well have gone on to be wittily dubbed GateShock 2: Sea of DRMs.

There will be no SecuROM install limits for either the retail or digital editions of BioShock 2, and SecuROM will be used only to verify the game's executable and check the date. Beyond that, we are only using standard Games for Windows Live non-SSA guidelines, which, per Microsoft, comes with 15 activations (after that, you can reset them with a call to Microsoft.)

This implementation is identical to that of other titles such as Batman: Arkham Asylum, says Tobey, which caused far less outrage and was apparently often cited to her as an example of reasonable DRM during BioScandal 2: The Gate of DRMs.

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/62072

There is still online activation and a 15 machine install limit through GFWL. I'm scratching my head trying to figure out how this is any better..

 

[CP5670]

Now when paying customers have to rely on pirates to make their games playable, you know DRM is out of control.

Exactly, there are people like me who won't buy most games these days until after a crack has been released and is reasonably widely verified to be working. So maybe it's better for the publishers if their games are cracked quickly.

 

[scooterlibby]

The OTHER subject of this thread was the PC requirements. Judging from what they listed, sounds like there will not be much of a change in the graphics (not that I expected a huge jump).

Bioshock used the Unreal engine, right? I just read over in PCGamesHardware that they had added new lighting code to the engine. http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...evelopment-kit-reveal-enhanced-lighting/News/

I wonder if that will be implemented in Bioshock 2. Unlike the rest of the world, I kind of enjoyed the DX10 tweaks in the first, however subtle that they were.

 

[mindcycle]

lol

Bioshock 2 drops activation limits for... activation limits
via Ars Technica

 

[Maximilian]

lol

Bioshock 2 drops activation limits for... activation limits
via Ars Technica

Heh... six and half dozen :/

Piss poor they dont just release the thing on steam without any of the bundled securom or GFWL suckage. Most of their sales will be on consoles anyways why they are putting so much effort into this is beyond me, seems like a clueless higher up was tasked with overseeing the PC version and decided more DRM = less piracy = better.