Did Atari not learn anything from EA and 3 activation limits?!

[NoWhereM]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: NoWhereM

Originally posted by: BladeVenom
So how's it selling? With all this great DRM they have, they must be selling millions, even tens of millions since they have at least temporarily stopped piracy of their game.

No idea, but I buy most of my new games from Amazon.com and looking there it doesn't appear to be doing to well.

On Amazon.com's Hot New Releases in Video Games PC game list Dark Athena is currently #22. One seller even has it brand new for $30.83 shipped. I guess #22 isn't that bad considering the tough competition it's going up against amoung other new PC game releases. Reel Deal Slots: The Adventure just came out and is sitting at #7. It's only $19.99 new purchased directly from Amazon.com. Who would really want to spend an extra $10 for Dark Athena when they can play Reel Deal Slots instead?

It is odd, though, looking at the list for this hour Demigod is sitting at #4. I thought games with no copy protection didn't sell as well as those with copy protection because everyone just pirated them instead of buying them.

Hahaha, it seems you're resigned to continuously comment ignorantly on the topic, but Demigod as an example?

Yes a perfect example of a game with no copy protection selling much better than one with excessive DRM. In the hour I looked Demigod was actually #7 on Amazon.com's list of best selling PC Game products, Dark Athena wasn't even in the top 100. So to compare I pulled up the best selling New Releases in PC Games in which Demigod was #4 and Dark Athena was #22.

As far as me continuing to post ignorantly in this thread, it was me that proved you were lying about Bioshock giving back activations by simply uninstalling. I guess you might feel it ignorant to point out when you are lying, I consider it a service.

 

[NoWhereM]

Originally posted by: coloumb

Originally posted by: NoWhereM

Originally posted by: BladeVenom
So how's it selling? With all this great DRM they have, they must be selling millions, even tens of millions since they have at least temporarily stopped piracy of their game.

No idea, but I buy most of my new games from Amazon.com and looking there it doesn't appear to be doing to well.

On Amazon.com's Hot New Releases in Video Games PC game list Dark Athena is currently #22. One seller even has it brand new for $30.83 shipped. I guess #22 isn't that bad considering the tough competition it's going up against amoung other new PC game releases. Reel Deal Slots: The Adventure just came out and is sitting at #7. It's only $19.99 new purchased directly from Amazon.com. Who would really want to spend an extra $10 for Dark Athena when they can play Reel Deal Slots instead?

It is odd, though, looking at the list for this hour Demigod is sitting at #4. I thought games with no copy protection didn't sell as well as those with copy protection because everyone just pirated them instead of buying them.

I know of quite a few people [gamers] who would rather play Reel Deal Slots than dark athena

Look at today's top sellers in game downloads - I for one wouldn't buy any of those, but the same "gamers" who would buy Reel Deal Slots would definitely buy those games.

Over the last week I've played Peggle Deluxe more than any other PC game, so I think I can believe more people would rather play Ree Deal Slots than Dark Athena. Sometimes you just don't have the time to devote to a game like STALKER.

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: chizow
How naive do Brad Wardell's comments on piracy seem now? Stardock is certainly learning the hard way that their anti-DRM stance wasn't "scoring points" and acting as some anti-Pirate OFF!, they just hadn't yet made a game worth pirating. I guess we'll see if they continue on with their naive anti-DRM stance for future titles.

Brad Wardell: But here?s the thing: While piracy is annoying, you can?t blame piracy for this problem. Let?s face it, there?s plenty of data out there about how many pirated games are being played. We should have looked at that. ...
... But had we looked at what other publishers have said, we would have known that it?s not unusual for there to be hundreds of thousands of warez copies in use. And if we had, we could have simply had the retail version not have any HTTP calls in it and instead just had an update button on the main menu to check for updates and voila, problem solved.

Originally posted by: chizow
In the meantime, Demigod serves as another good example of how piracy not only has a serious negative impact on the publisher/developer's sales..

Brad Wardell: The second misconception is the argument that because Demigod?s retail version is heavily pirated that it costs massive sales. But that, again, puts the blame on the wrong parties.

http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/n.../Demigod-Status-Update[/quote]

Originally posted by: chizow
So again, we can believe a statement from the publisher, Atari, along with direct confirmation ... or we can believe the misinterpreted misinformation from a virtual nobody

 

[NoWhereM]

Originally posted by: Red Irish
And if increased piracy rates are not preventing good sales, what can we conclude?

That chizow has wasted countless hours spreading misinformation that could have been better spent by helping the less fortunate in his/her community or at least by playing Peggle?

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: NoWhereM

Originally posted by: Red Irish
And if increased piracy rates are not preventing good sales, what can we conclude?

That chizow has wasted countless hours spreading misinformation that could have been better spent by helping the less fortunate in his/her community or at least by playing Peggle?

Chizow is the less fortunate in his/her community. Hes clearly decluded and needs help

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: NoWhereM
Yes a perfect example of a game with no copy protection selling much better than one with excessive DRM. In the hour I looked Demigod was actually #7 on Amazon.com's list of best selling PC Game products, Dark Athena wasn't even in the top 100. So to compare I pulled up the best selling New Releases in PC Games in which Demigod was #4 and Dark Athena was #22.

Except Piracy and DRM do not directly impact the potential market, popularity, or quality of a given title, they simply erode potential sales from within that population. If Demigod appeals to a broader audience, obviously it may see both greater sales and in this case, clearly greater piracy rates compared to a Mature Rated, highly violent FPS like Riddick. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't have sold better if you shifted that ratio of sales to piracy within that sample population.

What's ironic here of course is that similar arguments proving the opposite with regard to Spore, a vastly popular title which appealed to a broad audience which suffered both a massive piracy total but also massive total sales, went largely ignored by anti-DRM/pro-Piracy meat shields like yourself. Funny how that works!

Originally posted by: NoWhereM
As far as me continuing to post ignorantly in this thread, it was me that proved you were lying about Bioshock giving back activations by simply uninstalling. I guess you might feel it ignorant to point out when you are lying, I consider it a service.

No, I said "activation SecuROM" without specifics with the direct quote is below:

• Originally posted by: chizow
  Heh the same usual suspects, dealing in the same brand of fearmongering and misinformation, as usual. What makes anyone think this version of activation SecuROM is any different from the others used in the past, where activations are returned automatically when the game is uninstalled on any given machine?

Bioshock did serve to prove it was possible activation limited DRM could be annulled automatically without any patch or user-intervention whatsoever. Every other activation-based SecuROM that received unsubstantiated criticism, like Spore, Crysis Warhead, Mass Effect, etc. did return activations on uninstall, yet you never bothered to clarify those lies and misinformation. I wonder why?

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Brad Wardell: But here?s the thing: While piracy is annoying, you can?t blame piracy for this problem. Let?s face it, there?s plenty of data out there about how many pirated games are being played. We should have looked at that. ...
... But had we looked at what other publishers have said, we would have known that it?s not unusual for there to be hundreds of thousands of warez copies in use. And if we had, we could have simply had the retail version not have any HTTP calls in it and instead just had an update button on the main menu to check for updates and voila, problem solved.

Wardell is certainly entitled to his opinion, it sounds like he thinks ignoring the problem somehow makes it go away. His suggested prevention of simply turning off HTTP calls so he can bury his head in the sand and ignore the piracy data is pretty funny actually. The irony is that piracy directly increased his level of support for non-paying customers, which goes directly against his previous position of choosing to ignore pirates. Easy enough to ignore until they bring down your entire network infrastructure.

Brad Wardell: The second misconception is the argument that because Demigod?s retail version is heavily pirated that it costs massive sales. But that, again, puts the blame on the wrong parties.

http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/n.../Demigod-Status-Update[/quote]
Yep, and he very clearly admits the rampant piracy hurt their sales by denying existing customers access to servers and online play, by impacting reviews, and through resulting negative PR and word of mouth feedback. There's even a thread here bemoaning the server/online interface due to the problems caused directly by piracy.

His solution of course is to just ignore them as if they weren't sales, which is fine, but that doesn't disregard the fact rampant piracy in this case did more to negatively impact the end-user experience than anything DRM could ever possibly be blamed for. DRM as a potential inconvenience for 1-10% of the paying populous, or 100% denial of online gameplay...hmmm.

Originally posted by: chizow
So again, we can believe a statement from the publisher, Atari, along with direct confirmation ... or we can believe the misinterpreted misinformation from a virtual nobody

[/quote]
What's confusing? His comments very clearly demonstrate the negative impact of piracy on his game and his company, he's just maintaining his naive laissez-faire attitude about it. I guess we'll see how that impacts his decisions in the future.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: Maximilian

Originally posted by: NoWhereM

Originally posted by: Red Irish
And if increased piracy rates are not preventing good sales, what can we conclude?

That chizow has wasted countless hours spreading misinformation that could have been better spent by helping the less fortunate in his/her community or at least by playing Peggle?

Chizow is the less fortunate in his/her community. Hes clearly decluded and needs help

You might be right, I do live in a pretty respectable community. I could probably get away with leaving my door, car, etc unlocked. But then I remember there's trash like you floating around out there, and figure that's probably not a good idea.

As for playing Peggle? LOL. Why would I bother with Peggle when I can play Riddick? LMAO, damn, you must be bored.

Finished EfBB yesterday, awesome game for anyone who didn't play the original, like me. Dark Athena looks to be even better so far with improved artwork, textures, enemy AI with the same great story, voice acting and cinematic elements.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: apoppin

Consoles are the MOST restrictive form of DRM on earth
- that is a ridiculous statement you just made

How so? I can buy a used 360 game (any game), throw it in the drive and be playing in seconds. I can get a new console, throw that same disk in, and be playing in seconds. I can sell the same game to somebody else, who can then throw it in their 360 and be playing in seconds.

How is it "the MOST restrictive form of DRM on earth". I genuinely want your opinion on this.

Agreed, if the 360 DRM isn't limiting a 2nd hand market for the game, doesn't require Online activation, will play on any 360 without issues, and will play into perpetuity as long as the hardware platform is available; how is the DRM restrictive? It's only restrictive to pirates, but that's not what this thread is addressing. We're trying to address how DRM is restrictive to the PC version's paying customers.

Tages is certainly good at preventing illegal piracy of Dark Athena for PC, but falls quite short when it comes to being as consumer friendly as the 360/PS3 versions.

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: chizow
His suggested prevention of simply turning off HTTP calls so he can bury his head in the sand and ignore the piracy data is pretty funny actually.

Umm.. no. That's not why he talked about turning off HTTP calls.

Brad Wardell: What brought down servers was a lot more benign than that. It was the HTTPS requests to inform users if there was a new version along with checking the community features for info (friends lists, chat channels, etc.) and things like that. Things like that are pretty piddly. It?s only when you get a ton of users doing that at the same time that it becomes a problem as we saw.

http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/n.../Demigod-Status-Update

You just keep racking up your misinformation count today, nice work. :thumbsup:

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: apoppin

Try pirating a console game
:roll:

it IS doable .. however, it is not a big business like pirating PC games - even though there is a bigger base

PC gaming is easy to crack by comparison and you have to mod your console to do it - which means you can get banned by playing it online and then rendering it worthless

Steam would be the most restrictive form of PC DRM

and you guys are bitching and spreading FUD about AoDA which has the SAME DRM as FarCry and many other AAA titles
- we know Atari's clearly stated intentions .. in contrast to some of the posts here that deliberately spread FUD

Tell the modchip guys they don't have a "big business".

Yes, console pirating is a little harder than PC, and it costs more. But, I'd argue that console drm is about perfect - it works well and it doesn't inconvenience the end user.

Isn't that the whole argument against drm?

You get it.

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: Golgatha

Originally posted by: Raduque
Yes, console pirating is a little harder than PC, and it costs more. But, I'd argue that console drm is about perfect - it works well and it doesn't inconvenience the end user.

Isn't that the whole argument against drm?

You get it.

Yes, exactly.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Originally posted by: chizow
His suggested prevention of simply turning off HTTP calls so he can bury his head in the sand and ignore the piracy data is pretty funny actually.

Umm.. no. That's not why he talked about turning off HTTP calls.

Brad Wardell: What brought down servers was a lot more benign than that. It was the HTTPS requests to inform users if there was a new version along with checking the community features for info (friends lists, chat channels, etc.) and things like that. Things like that are pretty piddly. It?s only when you get a ton of users doing that at the same time that it becomes a problem as we saw.

http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/n.../Demigod-Status-Update

You just keep racking up your misinformation count today, good work. lol

As I understand it, the 18,000 legitimate installs got authenticated, got patches/updates/etc, and got to play Online. The 140,000 pirated hits on the game server didn't, but brought the servers down DoS style due to them automatically trying to communicate with the game servers on the game's first launch.

It is highly unfortunate that the pirates ruined it for the paying customers for the first couple of days of the game's lifetime, and also caused some negative commercial reviews due to "unstable" multiplayer on a game that's multiplayer focused.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Originally posted by: chizow
His suggested prevention of simply turning off HTTP calls so he can bury his head in the sand and ignore the piracy data is pretty funny actually.

Umm.. no. That's not why he talked about turning off HTTP calls.

Brad Wardell: What brought down servers was a lot more benign than that. It was the HTTPS requests to inform users if there was a new version along with checking the community features for info (friends lists, chat channels, etc.) and things like that. Things like that are pretty piddly. It?s only when you get a ton of users doing that at the same time that it becomes a problem as we saw.

http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/n.../Demigod-Status-Update

You just keep racking up your misinformation count today, good work. lol

Uh, yes it is, instead of having piracy all up-in-his-face and crashing his network infrastructure, his suggested solution for preventing problems was to simply turn off HTTP calls instead of addressing the root cause of the network overload problem: piracy.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: Golgatha

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: apoppin

Consoles are the MOST restrictive form of DRM on earth
- that is a ridiculous statement you just made

How so? I can buy a used 360 game (any game), throw it in the drive and be playing in seconds. I can get a new console, throw that same disk in, and be playing in seconds. I can sell the same game to somebody else, who can then throw it in their 360 and be playing in seconds.

How is it "the MOST restrictive form of DRM on earth". I genuinely want your opinion on this.

Agreed, if the 360 DRM isn't limiting a 2nd hand market for the game, doesn't require Online activation, will play on any 360 without issues, and will play into perpetuity as long as the hardware platform is available; how is the DRM restrictive? It's only restrictive to pirates, but that's not what this thread is addressing. We're trying to address how DRM is restrictive to the PC version's paying customers.

Tages is certainly good at preventing illegal piracy of Dark Athena for PC, but falls quite short when it comes to being as consumer friendly as the 360/PS3 versions.

What both of you fail to acknowledge is that those less intrusive forms of DRM actually work, and are effective at preventing piracy. And why is that? Because there are hardware, software and network controls in place that adequately enforce that DRM.

Attempting to draw parallels to the PC and asking why it doesn't rely on similar forms of DRM is clearly disingenous, unless you're willing to accept similar controls and restrictions for both hardware and software on your PC? Not likely given how much rhetoric and propaganda directly targetting similar controls, like SecuROM being a rootkit, not allowing for grey market imaging tools, optical drive ROM protections, etc.

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: chizow
Uh, yes it is, instead of having piracy all up-in-his-face and crashing his network infrastructure, his suggested solution for preventing problems was to simply turn off HTTP calls instead of addressing the root cause of the network overload problem: piracy.

Let me correct that for you.. the root cause was HTTP calls, which if turned off would have solved the problem even with lots of pirate copies in circulation. You may want to go back and actually read what Brad wrote, again.. maybe a few times.. since you obviously don't quite understand and would rather attempt to belittle his statements by spreading misinformation.

Brad Wardell: What brought down servers was a lot more benign than that. It was the HTTPS requests to inform users if there was a new version along with checking the community features for info (friends lists, chat channels, etc.) and things like that ...
.. And if we had, we could have simply had the retail version not have any HTTP calls in it and instead just had an update button on the main menu to check for updates and voila, problem solved.

http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/n.../Demigod-Status-Update

Keep trying man. It's actually quite funny watching you try and defend your contradictions and misinformation.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: mindcycle
Let me correct that for you.. the root cause was HTTP calls, which if turned off would have solved the problem even with lots of pirate copies in circulation. You may want to go back and actually read what Brad wrote, again.. maybe a few times.. since you obviously haven't done that yet.

Brad Wardell: What brought down servers was a lot more benign than that. It was the HTTPS requests to inform users if there was a new version along with checking the community features for info (friends lists, chat channels, etc.) and things like that ...
.. And if we had, we could have simply had the retail version not have any HTTP calls in it and instead just had an update button on the main menu to check for updates and voila, problem solved.

http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/n.../Demigod-Status-Update

Keep trying man. It's actually quite funny watching you try and defend your contradictions and misinformation.

LMAO. Again, I know what he's saying, he's saying "I want to shove my head in the sand and ignore piracy by ignoring the problems directly caused by piracy, instead of actually trying to prevent piracy."

How is this hard to understand? The number of HTTPS calls they were not equipped to handle were 100% caused by pirated copies pinging their servers. Most people would have attempted to prevent such a problem by, y'know, actually preventing the piracy in the first place.

Wardell is choosing to shove his head in the sand by simply ignoring those problems. In this case, he couldn't ignore them because they were all-up-in-his-face and in the process, negatively impacting the end-user more than any DRM would've, ever.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: Golgatha

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: apoppin

Consoles are the MOST restrictive form of DRM on earth
- that is a ridiculous statement you just made

How so? I can buy a used 360 game (any game), throw it in the drive and be playing in seconds. I can get a new console, throw that same disk in, and be playing in seconds. I can sell the same game to somebody else, who can then throw it in their 360 and be playing in seconds.

How is it "the MOST restrictive form of DRM on earth". I genuinely want your opinion on this.

Agreed, if the 360 DRM isn't limiting a 2nd hand market for the game, doesn't require Online activation, will play on any 360 without issues, and will play into perpetuity as long as the hardware platform is available; how is the DRM restrictive? It's only restrictive to pirates, but that's not what this thread is addressing. We're trying to address how DRM is restrictive to the PC version's paying customers.

Tages is certainly good at preventing illegal piracy of Dark Athena for PC, but falls quite short when it comes to being as consumer friendly as the 360/PS3 versions.

What both of you fail to acknowledge is that those less intrusive forms of DRM actually work, and are effective at preventing piracy. And why is that? Because there are hardware, software and network controls in place that adequately enforce that DRM.

Attempting to draw parallels to the PC and asking why it doesn't rely on similar forms of DRM is clearly disingenous, unless you're willing to accept similar controls and restrictions for both hardware and software on your PC? Not likely given how much rhetoric and propaganda directly targetting similar controls, like SecuROM being a rootkit, not allowing for grey market imaging tools, optical drive ROM protections, etc.

Well yes, I would concede that no one would want their PC as hardware/firmware DRMed as a 360, and you make a good point in that comparing the hardware/firmware DRM on the PC vs a console really is apples and oranges.

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: chizow
LMAO. Again, I know what he's saying, he's saying "I want to shove my head in the sand and ignore piracy by ignoring the problems directly caused by piracy, instead of actually trying to prevent piracy."

lol. Ok smart guy, point out where he specifically says he wants to ignore piracy rates. Oh wait... you can't. He's quite aware of what the piracy rates are and has provided specific numbers, so your statement is pure conjecture. And how does conjecture possibly help your pro-DRM stance? I thought you only posted in these threads to clear up FUD, not spread it..

Originally posted by: chizow
Most people would have attempted to prevent such a problem by, y'know, actually preventing the piracy in the first place.

Yeah, and most people will fail and piss off their customers by including unnecessary DRM, so how would that have solved anything? The solution was very clear in his statement, stop automatic HTTP calls, so now they know what to do next time to avoid problems. Plus, he has already effectively stopped pirates from playing the game online (which is 90% of the game) by including a serial number which is required for online play ..all without pissing off his paying customers with draconian DRM. Wow, what a concept!

lol... keep digging that hole man, maybe you can dig your way out of it if you only dig a couple more feet..

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: mindcycle
lol. Ok smart guy, point out where he specifically says he wants to ignore piracy rates. Oh wait... you can't. He's quite aware of what the piracy rates are and has provided specific numbers, so your statement is pure conjecture. And how does conjecture possibly help your pro-DRM stance? I thought you only posted in these threads to clear up FUD, not spread it..

Knowing the exact piracy rate was only a by-product of not being able to ignore piracy to begin with because it crashed his network. Once again, I'm well aware Wardell claims to be comfortable in his own skin with his stance on piracy (we'll see for just how long), and consistent with these claims are the fact he has "decided the best course of action was simply to ignore the piracy." Except in this case, he couldn't ignore it because piracy induced problems made ignoring piracy impossible.

Yeah, and most people will fail and piss off their customers by including unnecessary DRM, so how would that have solved anything?

No, most forms of DRM will be more effective than the minimalistic approach employed by Stardock and will also undoubtedly result in less intrusive interruption of service than a near-100% inability to enjoy the main focus of the game, online play.

The solution was very clear in his statement, stop automatic HTTP calls, so now they know what to do next time to avoid problems. Plus, he has already effectively stopped pirates from playing the game online (which is 90% of the game) by including a serial number which is required for online play ..all without pissing off his paying customers with draconian DRM. Wow, what a concept!

No, that's not a solution, its a band-aid. Its damage control. The damage was done the minute they decided to release the game without even the simplest forms of DRM or copy protection.

lol... keep digging that hole man, maybe you can dig your way out of it if you only dig a couple more feet..

Digging a hole? This is yet another perfect example of a developer being burned and punished the worst by releasing a game with minimal DRM. Not only was the title heavily pirated despite the lack of any intrusive DRM, it also caused the end-user more grief and harm than any form of DRM could ever be blamed for with near-100% denial of service. I'd like to say I was surprised by this obvious outcome, but then I'd be lying.

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: chizow
No, most forms of DRM will be more effective than the minimalistic approach employed by Stardock and will also undoubtedly result in less intrusive interruption of service than a near-100% inability to enjoy the main focus of the game, online play.

The solution to the problem was clearly stated by both Brad Wardell and quoted by me so may times, I think it's obvious who's burying their head in the sand at this point..

Originally posted by: chizow
No, that's not a solution, its a band-aid. Its damage control. The damage was done the minute they decided to release the game without even the simplest forms of DRM or copy protection.

lol.. So stopping HTTP calls and preventing the servers from going down isn't a solution?

http://clipart.coolclips.com/A...CoolClips_wb029051.gif

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: mindcycle
The solution to the problem was clearly stated by both Brad Wardell and quoted by me so may times, I think it's obvious who's burying their head in the sand at this point..

lol.. So stopping HTTP calls and preventing the servers from going down isn't a solution?

http://clipart.coolclips.com/A...CoolClips_wb029051.gif

LMAO, solution to what problem? The problem caused by piracy to begin with? Again, its not a solution, its a band-aid and reactionary and does nothing to prevent the originating problem: piracy. Blocking server calls does nothing to prevent the rampant piracy rate of the game that caused the problems to begin with. All it did was deliver the functionality promised originally to legitimate customers after a weekend of frustration. But I guess it has allowed Wardell to go back to ignoring piracy, just as he likes it.

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: chizow
All it did was deliver the functionality promised originally to legitimate customers

:thumbsup:

I knew you'd eventually get it..

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Originally posted by: chizow
All it did was deliver the functionality promised originally to legitimate customers

:thumbsup:

I knew you'd eventually get it..

LMAO, you still don't get it, as that band-aid would've never been necessary if rampant piracy wasn't an issue, and still does nothing to address the actual problem. As a result, Wardell's DRM strategy not only failed in minimizing the impact of piracy, it also clearly resulted in the opposite of his expectations and had a severe negative impact on legitimate paying customers. But at least he can go back to burying his head in the sand.

Why buy games without DRM when you end up seeing worst problems than games with DRM and your copy is just as crippled as the version the pirates are playing?

 

[NoWhereM]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: NoWhereM
As far as me continuing to post ignorantly in this thread, it was me that proved you were lying about Bioshock giving back activations by simply uninstalling. I guess you might feel it ignorant to point out when you are lying, I consider it a service.

No, I said "activation SecuROM" without specifics with the direct quote is below:

• Originally posted by: chizow
  Heh the same usual suspects, dealing in the same brand of fearmongering and misinformation, as usual. What makes anyone think this version of activation SecuROM is any different from the others used in the past, where activations are returned automatically when the game is uninstalled on any given machine?

Is that just another lie or have you actually managed to misinform yourself? Regardless, on page two of this thread you said:

Originally posted by: chizow
Yep, and that's the same BS that was spread about Spore, Mass Effect, Crysis Warhead, Bioshock and every other title that shipped with activation-based DRM that "ate" an installation each time you actually installed it, when that wasn't the case. In all of those games, an installation was returned provided you uninstalled the game, the only need for a revocation tool was if you exhausted all 3 of your installations and wiping your OS without first uninstalling the game.

So again, I guess it depends on your point of view as to whether my posts to this thread have been ignorant or a service.

Originally posted by: chizow
Bioshock did serve to prove it was possible activation limited DRM could be annulled automatically without any patch or user-intervention whatsoever. Every other activation-based SecuROM that received unsubstantiated criticism, like Spore, Crysis Warhead, Mass Effect, etc. did return activations on uninstall, yet you never bothered to clarify those lies and misinformation. I wonder why?

I just used Bioshock to prove what you are posting is misinformation because I happen to have the revoke tool saved to my computer (which of course has the Revoke Tool pdf included). I purchased Bioshock used, as soon as a revoke tool was released. I probably would have purchased Bioshock new and spent twice as much (I paid $15 shipped) if there hadn't been activation limits.