Right, you claimed I had no proof, when I clearly did. Again, its as simple as knowing and recognizing blatant misinformation based on actual knowledge and understanding of how something works. When someone posts their fabricated experiences or inaccurate understanding of how something works, its makes it very easy for someone who does have first-hand knowledge to recognize that dishonesty.
Again, maybe the first time, but this behavior is repeated over and over again from the same individuals. Red Irish seems to have a short memory in this regard as well, claiming I'm hostile in every thread as if a thread is somehow meant to be disjointed or erase false statements and claims made in other threads. But that's not how it works. If someone at work repeatedly lied or stole from you, how long do you think you'd be "polite" or refrain from accusing them of "lying through their teeth" before you did something about it?
While I agree the original news of a 3 machine-install limitation was a step backward, you created the thread without knowing all of the details, much of which was later clarified or corrected. You're also clearly referring to previous misinformation about SecuROM in your title by referring to EA and 2007, so again, how exactly is the DRM used in Athena directly relevant to SecuROM?
Originally posted by: chizow
Right, you claimed I had no proof, when I clearly did. Again, its as simple as knowing and recognizing blatant misinformation based on actual knowledge and understanding of how something works. When someone posts their fabricated experiences or inaccurate understanding of how something works, its makes it very easy for someone who does have first-hand knowledge to recognize that dishonesty.
You can claim there is no motive or intention to deceive, but again, its as simple as this: Why claim to know or have experience with something, when you clearly do not? Is that not an attempt to deceive to further a point? I would say absolutely, yes. As for "the pot calling kettle....", I've said it numerous times, I encourage you or anyone else to do the same if you feel I'm in any way being dishonest or disingenuous. From what we've seen in return all such accusations are limited to let's see....semantics, sentence structure, grammar and misinterpretation of simple punctuation.
Again, maybe the first time, but this behavior is repeated over and over again from the same individuals. Red Irish seems to have a short memory in this regard as well, claiming I'm hostile in every thread as if a thread is somehow meant to be disjointed or erase false statements and claims made in other threads. But that's not how it works. If someone at work repeatedly lied or stole from you, how long do you think you'd be "polite" or refrain from accusing them of "lying through their teeth" before you did something about it?
While I agree the original news of a 3 machine-install limitation was a step backward, you created the thread without knowing all of the details, much of which was later clarified or corrected. You're also clearly referring to previous misinformation about SecuROM in your title by referring to EA and 2007, so again, how exactly is the DRM used in Athena directly relevant to SecuROM?
I've asked already as a clear example of goal post shifting. What problems do you and others have with SecuROM activated titles given they pose none of the issues for the end-user that you claim to have problems with Riddick's DRM? What problems do you continue to have now that you know Atari has stated they plan to increase activations and remove all activation limits in the future? Its become obvious that certain individuals will find fault with any DRM using an ever-shifting set of criteria, but that the complaints are in fact loudest with regard to the most effective forms of DRM that prevent piracy.
So you had an installer or patch problem, which was fixed by an updated patch. There's nothing there that is endemic or limited to SecuROM. Looks like you're having problems with your ATI drivers, do you think its a problem with .NET as a whole and reason to boycott and scrap CCC and .NET? Or do you think its a localized problem that might be easily fixed?
And the DRM they employ in no way limit your ability to resell them, right? No need for any revoke tool, you could resell them with the full activation rights they shipped with provided you uninstalled them first. Bioshock being the exception with a 5x5 token at release, which was later completely removed automatically.
But again, all released data shows its a non-issue for most consumers with <10% even attempting a 2nd install for Riddick and <1% using up all their installations for EA SecuROM games. Its even less of an issue with SecuROM given installations are returned provided you rightfully uninstall the game first if you plan to transfer user rights.
And you're certainly entitled to live your life in fear but really, how is that different from anything else in life? Until then we'll just have to have a little faith in these companies given they've given us no reason to believe they'd go back on their promises to release patches to remove any activation DRM in the even they were to go out of business.
Yes I have read them and it boiled down to me peeling away that last bit of FUD regarding activation based limits.
I'm sorry Atari's word isn't good enough for you, but I think most people would take that level of assurance over the unfounded fearmongering in this thread and others from anonymous internet posters like yourself. Actually you do have the most basic contract in effect, its called the Social Contract. Although it does acknowledge Man will normally lie, cheat and steal if left to his own vices, it also acknowledges Man will gravitate towards law and order for the common good. In this case its clear Atari is now accountable for their actions and statements, which is more than I can claim for anyone in this thread claiming to have issue with their DRM.
Yep, they have actually, as I linked earlier for Alone in the Dark:
I would say you should spend more time learning how your PC, OS and software interact so you can spend less time having to worry about what innocuous DRM may or may not be doing to harm your PC.
Rofl, you're not going to see it on any contracts as I clearly wasn't referring to any literal written contract. Maybe look it up, you're not really doing yourself any favors in the credibility department here.
(head explodes):laugh:
LMAO. This is a no-brainer. Are we going to believe:
Originally posted by: apoppin
i'd like you all to know that FarCry2 has the same activation limit
- BUT - you are asked to revoke an activation if you reach your limit as i had to last night
.. no i didn't read the readme
Yep, it proved my point it was a technical issue that clearly wasn't an intended effect of the DRM. You can acknowledge that, can't you? Unless you think the CCC problems you're experiencing are intentional as well?Originally posted by: Golgatha
Talk about off topic. You bring up me comparing Tages to SecuROM and then try to compare my issues with SecuROM to my ATI CCC installation problems? Also, it was the patch (which subsequently updated the SecuROM version) that caused the Explorer.exe crashes.
But those revoke tools aren't necessary at all provided you actually uninstall the game in the first place, which again shows all the misinformation regarding SecuROM's activation limits were largely unsubstantiated.
No, not really, I basically stated how a transaction like that would actually occur. And in the case a problem did arise after sale and contract were signed, you would still have recourse, based largely on the Social Contract and common law, to address those issues with a verbal agreement or handshake first before resorting to any formal legal recourse.
See, that's where general accountability and if necessary, your EULA comes in. Its a two-way street, and holds both parties accountable. Again, you can come with that unsubstantiated fearmongering all you like, but it really does ring hollow without relevant facts to back it up. If Atari does reneg on their statements then you'd actually have a reason to be upset, but all this uproar just because you don't believe them based on nothing is ridiculous.
Yes, really. While that may certainly provide someone here with some assurance if they were to trade with you, you're still going to come across as some random poster on the internet to most readers here, and especially anyone external to these forums. Certainly you don't think your opinion or account is any more credible than anyone else's, and especially not moreso than a post by an Atari employee on their official forums do you?
And what does its popularity or sales have anything to do with the fact they released a revoke tool for AITD? If anything it further proves their commitment to supporting their games and relaxing DRM after its served its purpose.
If you don't understand a term, telling me that I may not understand it is pretty weak when you could have simply looked it up yourself. Your arguments are strawmen because they are easily disprovable statements that do not reflect the actual positions of anybody in this thread. "DRM doesn't do anything" is a viewpoint held by nobody, in fact this entire thread is about DRM doing quite a lot of things.
Your bolded statement is the real position held by many anti-DRM advocates. It does fall outside of the scope of your arguments, which is exactly why I labeled them strawmen.
Unless the increase in sales from the minority of pirates who would have purchased the game anyway is outweighed by the loss in both current and future sales resulting from the DRM, which in your bolded statement above you identify as still being an unknown. As long as that is unknown, you can't say whether it is an unnecessary inconvenience or a necessary inconvenience.
I think we've had this discussion before. I originally purchased BioShock for the PC, returned it due to the ridiculous DRM, and now have BioShock for the PS3. I also don't think that I am in any way unusual or special in this regard. DRM simply isn't an issue for consoles at all.
Choosing to base your opinions on data that clearly does not answer the real question is worse than not having any basis for your opinions. In the latter case you would be aware of the large likelihood that you are incorrect, while in the former you are not only overconfident of the answer but you can expect to be systematically wrong in the same direction that your data is biased in.
It is strange to me that someone who likes the most restrictive DRM -- despises one that is less restrictive. The big argument against not having a revoke tool, is selling it - and you cannot sell any Steam game without paying that company a ransom.
Different strokes for different folks applies here. Steam is terrible if you want to resell games but has been excellent for me otherwise. Like many people on these forums I love to upgrade my system fairly constantly and I love being able to easily move my gaming library around with me and then access the same games on my laptop when traveling. I'm not terribly concerned about Steam being shut down because I think it is a valuable service with a great fiscal outlook in the form of potential revenue from a constant user base. Should Valve go under, many companies would be eager to buy the service from them.
Originally posted by: apoppin
IGN gave Dark Athena a 7.2; i managed to give it an 8.2 overall as it brings nothing new to EfBB except the graphics and more of the same; it lost the "anytime save" which is my only other minor annoyance
It is strange to me that someone who likes the most restrictive DRM -- despises one that is less restrictive. The big argument against not having a revoke tool, is selling it - and you cannot sell any Steam game without paying that company a ransom.
AND FC2 only mentions the revoke tool in the readme .. i lost a couple evidently when i uninstalled it but didn't get "credit" for it
No DRM is perfect; no one really want is .. but the publishers have to protect themselves against the conscienceless pirates who steal them blind without it and spread hateful lies when they are stopped by the copy protection .. the pattern is clear to even one who does not have godlike powers; only insight is necessary
http://pc.ign.com/objects/142/14294667.html
oops, 7.4 but the reviewer even got LOST during this very linear game and he bitches about that
Facebook
Twitter