• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

DRM for Stalker Clear Sky?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: lupi
Originally posted by: drebo
blah blah blah.



Still waiting for someone to show a study that shows the effectiveness of these implementations.

Casual Games and Piracy

DRM is only going to get more restrictive. I wouldn't be surprised to see more companies jump on the same bandwagon as STEAM - a 100% digital distribution format that legitimately ensures 1 copy per person. If you want to install and play the game on a different computer - then you either have to let your buddies have your account information or you have to pirate the game. And you can NEVER re-sell the game because it's linked to your account. You'd have to sell your account [which you probably can't due to the EULA you agreed to when you signed up].

1 copy per person is pretty much how it works on today's consoles [except you can resell the game].

5 *activation* limit = you are limited to ACTIVATION the game on 5 DIFFERENT hardware configurations [assuming the activation works the same as Crysis - you can install it on the same machine as many times as you want]. FYI - 5 installs = 4 lost sales for the publisher/developer.

So - how is the activation limit preventing you from enjoying the game? I've played Crysis Warhead, STALKER Clear Sky, Mass Effect - nothing prevented me from enjoying any of those games. And I've since resold them to others who will also enjoy the games [well.. except for STALKER Clear Sky - that game is so freakin buggy].

And other than the annoying bugs, I've been enjoying Vista too. I've had to call up India Microsoft re-activation center once - but that only took about 10 minutes of my time.
 
I bought Stalker Clear Sky without knowing it had install limits. It's awesome that they make no mention of this on either the box or in the product description. :roll: Finding this out makes me want to smash my copy and send it back to the publisher in pieces. That may sound a little extreme, but i'm so sick of restrictive DRM. Knowing I supported it without being informed upfront is appalling to me.

Sadly, it's DRM like this and the DRM EA is using that is quickly making me turn more toward my 360 than my beloved PC. Over the past month or two i've purchased more games for my 360 than my PC. It's the first time i've purchased more console games vs PC games since I got into PC gaming back in the early 90's.

Everyone keeps talking about how PC gaming is dying. I don't really agree that's it's dying necessarily, but it's definitely in a slump. Restrictive DRM is doing nothing to help the industry get out of that slump though.. All it's doing is turning more people towards consoles and piracy.
 
Originally posted by: Martimus
If no one follows that part of the EULA, then that tells you that it isn't something that people are willing to do with their purchased product. It is really just unreasonably trying to push your product the way you want it to be used, when the market wants it in a different way. It will only hurt the publishers that do that in time, while entrepreneurs (such as Stardock) will look at what the Market wants and provide it in the way they want it, and prosper. The thing about the way DRM is being implemented will work its way out, since people don't like it enough that they just won't buy it, so sales will be affected. This will either force some publishers to abandon the marketplace (PC Sales), change the way they sell product (actually try to give the market what it wants), or fail (like so many have done recently.) New publishers will come forward, and the marketplace will evolve all on it's own. It is just frustrating to be a part of it now during the Chaos. There is money to be made here, but many publishers are starting to cut off their nose, just to spite their face.

I am frustrated about the activation limit, and I will not buy a game that is not transferrable. I am sorry if a publisher wants that, but I don't. It just means I won't buy a game from that publisher. It is pretty simple. It is supposed to be something that I play in my spare time, for enjoyment, but putting unnecessary restrictions on something that is supposed to be enjoyable is counterproductive, and after a point makes it no longer worth it. They are coming to that point with these actions.

Only time will tell whether or not Star Dock's publicity stunt will work.

As far as everything else goes, the product is the company's and they are the ones who decide how the product is to be used. The license is in no way unreasonable, and for the company who produced the product to enforce its license is completely and totally reasonable. Some products have use limits on them by nature. A car, for instance, can only every be driven by one person at a time. A tennis racket is the same way. A bowling ball. A baseball bat. A football. The list goes on and on. A computer game is not so easy to regulate, and for the most part has been up to the honor system.

The proliferation of writable CD rom drives, and now broadband internet, has made circumvention of game licenses far easier. Game companies must adapt to ensure that their products are not left behind. Think of it this way...without the DRM, one person in a group of 10 friends could buy the game and all 10 could play it. How is this a good situation for the game company? It's not. The game company wants all 10 to buy the game, and if all 10 want to play the game, all 10 should have to buy the game.

The software industry is different from the physical goods industry in that there is no physical assistance in the regulation of how the product is used and distrubuted. You can't download a football from the internet or burn a copy of a hockey stick. These companies are simply protecting their investments.

Does it stop everyone? No. It's not meant to. These DRM schemes are meant to stop the guy who buys a game and makes copies of it for all his friends. It's meant to stop people from installing the game for everyone in their family, immediate and extended. It's meant to regulate the use of the game to conform to the license of the software.

Basically, if you don't like it, don't buy the game. However, even though 2000 people complained about Spore on Amazon, 2 million other people still bought the game because they wanted to play it. It's a drop in the bucket. Why? Because the vast majority of PC gamers use the games in the intended method. The only people who are complaining about DRM are the people who were already planning not to abide by the license of the game by installing it on multiple computers, installing it on friends/siblings/family member's computers, etc. The people who intended to use the game in the method in which it was meant to be used will be completely unaffected by the DRM.

Once again, if you don't agree with the license of the product, it is your right as a consumer not to buy that product. There are no other restrictions imposed by DRM that have not already been imposed by game and software licenses for years. If you have a problem with that, you're free to not play the games. However, it is also the publisher's right to protect his investment and make money on their product.
 
Originally posted by: drebo
As far as everything else goes, the product is the company's and they are the ones who decide how the product is to be used. The license is in no way unreasonable, and for the company who produced the product to enforce its license is completely and totally reasonable. Some products have use limits on them by nature. A car, for instance, can only every be driven by one person at a time. A tennis racket is the same way. A bowling ball. A baseball bat. A football. The list goes on and on. A computer game is not so easy to regulate, and for the most part has been up to the honor system.

The real life equivalent of TAGES, SecuROM, etc.. would be buying a football that comes with an automatic deflate "protection" scheme. You can only use it on 5 different fields before it deflates and you have to call the manufacturer and hope they'll tell you the magic word that inflates it again.

 
Originally posted by: drebo
Originally posted by: Martimus
If no one follows that part of the EULA, then that tells you that it isn't something that people are willing to do with their purchased product. It is really just unreasonably trying to push your product the way you want it to be used, when the market wants it in a different way. It will only hurt the publishers that do that in time, while entrepreneurs (such as Stardock) will look at what the Market wants and provide it in the way they want it, and prosper. The thing about the way DRM is being implemented will work its way out, since people don't like it enough that they just won't buy it, so sales will be affected. This will either force some publishers to abandon the marketplace (PC Sales), change the way they sell product (actually try to give the market what it wants), or fail (like so many have done recently.) New publishers will come forward, and the marketplace will evolve all on it's own. It is just frustrating to be a part of it now during the Chaos. There is money to be made here, but many publishers are starting to cut off their nose, just to spite their face.

I am frustrated about the activation limit, and I will not buy a game that is not transferrable. I am sorry if a publisher wants that, but I don't. It just means I won't buy a game from that publisher. It is pretty simple. It is supposed to be something that I play in my spare time, for enjoyment, but putting unnecessary restrictions on something that is supposed to be enjoyable is counterproductive, and after a point makes it no longer worth it. They are coming to that point with these actions.

Only time will tell whether or not Star Dock's publicity stunt will work.

As far as everything else goes, the product is the company's and they are the ones who decide how the product is to be used. The license is in no way unreasonable, and for the company who produced the product to enforce its license is completely and totally reasonable. Some products have use limits on them by nature. A car, for instance, can only every be driven by one person at a time. A tennis racket is the same way. A bowling ball. A baseball bat. A football. The list goes on and on. A computer game is not so easy to regulate, and for the most part has been up to the honor system.

The proliferation of writable CD rom drives, and now broadband internet, has made circumvention of game licenses far easier. Game companies must adapt to ensure that their products are not left behind. Think of it this way...without the DRM, one person in a group of 10 friends could buy the game and all 10 could play it. How is this a good situation for the game company? It's not. The game company wants all 10 to buy the game, and if all 10 want to play the game, all 10 should have to buy the game.

The software industry is different from the physical goods industry in that there is no physical assistance in the regulation of how the product is used and distrubuted. You can't download a football from the internet or burn a copy of a hockey stick. These companies are simply protecting their investments.

Does it stop everyone? No. It's not meant to. These DRM schemes are meant to stop the guy who buys a game and makes copies of it for all his friends. It's meant to stop people from installing the game for everyone in their family, immediate and extended. It's meant to regulate the use of the game to conform to the license of the software.

Basically, if you don't like it, don't buy the game. However, even though 2000 people complained about Spore on Amazon, 2 million other people still bought the game because they wanted to play it. It's a drop in the bucket. Why? Because the vast majority of PC gamers use the games in the intended method. The only people who are complaining about DRM are the people who were already planning not to abide by the license of the game by installing it on multiple computers, installing it on friends/siblings/family member's computers, etc. The people who intended to use the game in the method in which it was meant to be used will be completely unaffected by the DRM.

Once again, if you don't agree with the license of the product, it is your right as a consumer not to buy that product. There are no other restrictions imposed by DRM that have not already been imposed by game and software licenses for years. If you have a problem with that, you're free to not play the games. However, it is also the publisher's right to protect his investment and make money on their product.

I am not talking about Stardocks publicity stint. I didn't even know about it until about a week ago. (I bought my first game from Stardock in 2002) They have always gone DRM free, but I don't care about DRM. What I care about is the activation limit, and DRM that is given root access on your OS. And yes, I will avoid buying software that causes me more trouble than I feel it is worth. What is different about Stardock is that they attempt to give the customers what they want, instead of giving them what they want the customers to have. This has worked great in their core business, and is turning out great for the Game business as well.

I am pretty sure you missed the point of my post. Just because a lot of people are buying games that cause other issues now, doesn't mean they will do so in the future. It is called buyers remorse, and when you get something of low quality, you are unlikely to buy it again. Look at the auto industry. People couldn't buy Hyundais fast enough years ago, but they broke down and people stopped buying them after a while. When you buy a product and it has some annoying aspect to it, are you likely to buy it again if you can find an alternative? Of course not. The people that come up with the alternative are going to take that portion of the business. Like Southwest took so much business from the rest of the airline companies. It isn't something that will happen overnight, but I have faith that these issues will no longer be around in ten years, because people woon't stand for it when there are other options available. Why do you think so many people have consoles now, and console sales are so much higher than PC sales. Because you know that a console game will just work! It isn't because it is easier, because everyone could just load up a game on the computer at any time, where as they need to take the console out just to play the game. DRM that impedes the game from working on the PC doesn't help. It doesn't help that I am afraid to buy this game because of perceived issues - whether real or not - that this DRM scheme brings forward. I want to be able to pull it out in 5 years and actually know that it will work if I am feeling nostalgic. Is that so hard to understand?

I doubt the activation limit will increase sales any more than the rest of the TAGES system, so I wish they would have left that part out. I don't mind TAGES, and I don't mind paying for games (in fact I would never pirate a game, because that would be a douche bag move.) I do mind having an activation limit on the game that I am considering buying. It wouldn't bother me much if it was a regular FPS, since I doubt i would install it again, but I know that I installed the original at least 4-5 times while I was swapping out components on my PC.
 
Originally posted by: coloumb
Originally posted by: lupi
Originally posted by: drebo
blah blah blah.



Still waiting for someone to show a study that shows the effectiveness of these implementations.

Casual Games and Piracy

DRM is only going to get more restrictive. I wouldn't be surprised to see more companies jump on the same bandwagon as STEAM - a 100% digital distribution format that legitimately ensures 1 copy per person. If you want to install and play the game on a different computer - then you either have to let your buddies have your account information or you have to pirate the game. And you can NEVER re-sell the game because it's linked to your account. You'd have to sell your account [which you probably can't due to the EULA you agreed to when you signed up].

1 copy per person is pretty much how it works on today's consoles [except you can resell the game].

5 *activation* limit = you are limited to ACTIVATION the game on 5 DIFFERENT hardware configurations [assuming the activation works the same as Crysis - you can install it on the same machine as many times as you want]. FYI - 5 installs = 4 lost sales for the publisher/developer.

So - how is the activation limit preventing you from enjoying the game? I've played Crysis Warhead, STALKER Clear Sky, Mass Effect - nothing prevented me from enjoying any of those games. And I've since resold them to others who will also enjoy the games [well.. except for STALKER Clear Sky - that game is so freakin buggy].

And other than the annoying bugs, I've been enjoying Vista too. I've had to call up India Microsoft re-activation center once - but that only took about 10 minutes of my time.




lol. What a case study based off some crappy flash game.
 
And now, an example of the reason DRM is bad


From: Walmart Music Team
Date: Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 7:42 PM
Subject: Important Information About Your Walmart.com Digital Music Purchases
To: xxxxxx@gmail.com

Important Information About Your Digital Music Purchases

We hope you are enjoying the increased music quality/bitrate and the improved usability of Walmart's MP3 music downloads. We began offering MP3s in August 2007 and have offered only DRM (digital rights management) -free MP3s since February 2008. As the final stage of our transition to a full DRM-free MP3 download store, Walmart will be shutting down our digital rights management system that supports protected songs and albums purchased from our site.

If you have purchased protected WMA music files from our site prior to Feb 2008, we strongly recommend that you back up your songs by burning them to a recordable audio CD. By backing up your songs, you will be able to access them from any personal computer. This change does not impact songs or albums purchased after Feb 2008, as those are DRM-free.

Beginning October 9, we will no longer be able to assist with digital rights management issues for protected WMA files purchased from Walmart.com. If you do not back up your files before this date, you will no longer be able to transfer your songs to other computers or access your songs after changing or reinstalling your operating system or in the event of a system crash. Your music and video collections will still play on the originally authorized computer.

Thank you for using Walmart.com for music downloads. We are working hard to make our store better than ever and easier to use.

Walmart Music Team
 
Originally posted by: drebo

Only time will tell whether or not Star Dock's publicity stunt will work.

As far as everything else goes, the product is the company's and they are the ones who decide how the product is to be used. The license is in no way unreasonable, and for the company who produced the product to enforce its license is completely and totally reasonable. Some products have use limits on them by nature. A car, for instance, can only every be driven by one person at a time. A tennis racket is the same way. A bowling ball. A baseball bat. A football. The list goes on and on. A computer game is not so easy to regulate, and for the most part has been up to the honor system.

The proliferation of writable CD rom drives, and now broadband internet, has made circumvention of game licenses far easier. Game companies must adapt to ensure that their products are not left behind. Think of it this way...without the DRM, one person in a group of 10 friends could buy the game and all 10 could play it. How is this a good situation for the game company? It's not. The game company wants all 10 to buy the game, and if all 10 want to play the game, all 10 should have to buy the game.

The software industry is different from the physical goods industry in that there is no physical assistance in the regulation of how the product is used and distrubuted. You can't download a football from the internet or burn a copy of a hockey stick. These companies are simply protecting their investments.

Does it stop everyone? No. It's not meant to. These DRM schemes are meant to stop the guy who buys a game and makes copies of it for all his friends. It's meant to stop people from installing the game for everyone in their family, immediate and extended. It's meant to regulate the use of the game to conform to the license of the software.

Basically, if you don't like it, don't buy the game. However, even though 2000 people complained about Spore on Amazon, 2 million other people still bought the game because they wanted to play it. It's a drop in the bucket. Why? Because the vast majority of PC gamers use the games in the intended method. The only people who are complaining about DRM are the people who were already planning not to abide by the license of the game by installing it on multiple computers, installing it on friends/siblings/family member's computers, etc. The people who intended to use the game in the method in which it was meant to be used will be completely unaffected by the DRM.

Once again, if you don't agree with the license of the product, it is your right as a consumer not to buy that product. There are no other restrictions imposed by DRM that have not already been imposed by game and software licenses for years. If you have a problem with that, you're free to not play the games. However, it is also the publisher's right to protect his investment and make money on their product.

So DRM is meant to enforce EULAs? EULAs are a joke anyway. How can you agree to something before you've read it?

"By clicking here you agree to this EULA. If you do not agree, return the software to the place of purchase." How many stores allow unopened software returns, much less opened ones? No store I know of in town does this.

DRM doesn't do anything but annoy people. It's meant to stop piracy, but as many many others have said in the past, the pirated copies don't even have the DRM included anymore. How can the DRM stop piracy if it's not even there? Plus as somebody else mentioned, the security risk. If pirates can so easily break it, what do you think malware authors (who are in it for money - adware, popups, spam zombies, etc) can do if they find out a DRM scheme's service is vulnerable?

If you want to boil it down, DRM is like going into a store and having somebody hired by the owner to follow you around with a baseball bat. Activations can be likened to a chain like this, where you can only go into five different locations before the guy with the baseball bat starts hitting you for trying to go into the 6th location. You wouldn't like that very much, would you?



Edit: For the record, I actually don't mind activating. The problem is when they go beyond simply activating.
 
Originally posted by: GundamSonicZeroX
Originally posted by: coloumb
Hey - at least you can remove TAGES - the company offers an executable which allows you to remove it.
Really? Details? Does it get rid of the activation limit, or just the limit?

Just the program itself.

You have to use alternative methods if you want to bypass the activation [kinda like when you rent a DVD movie and "rip" the protection while saving the contents to your hard drive].
 
To villify a game studio for protecting their business is just plain stupid. Would you prefer they stop making games for the PC? I know I sure wouldn't.

I'd completely agree with you if you could name for me anything else, withing reason, that one cannot split the cost of what they buy with their friends and then share amongst friends. I have a brother who also likes to play games, and like everything else in the commercial world, when two people like the same thing, if they don't mind sharing it, they can split the bill, buy it together, and share it equally. Even console games allow for this, although one must lend their friend the disk and they can even play multi-player if one friend is willing to come and share the console with two controllers. You think board game makers have the right to insist that only you and one other specific person can play that game. If any other person wants to play it too, they have to buy their own copy. No, that's absurd!!!

It's like that one guy said, they don't regard what the consumer market wants when they install these DRM's. Most don't, but some do. Mount and Blade did, as far as I can tell. So did Egosoft's X3TC. They use Tages, but don't set up stupid install limits, and don't require a disk check or even an online check. I borrowed that gem from my brother just like the one I mentioned below, but I ended up buying my own copy later on anyway.

Also, another person up there brought up a great point, it's not about protecting their investment at all, it's about stopping the very legal practice of selling one's used games. By stopping this from happening, people are forced to buy them new if they want them.

I'll tell you something I did that was on the borderline. I borrowed Oblivion from my brother and installed it. I borrowed the game disk from him when he wasn't playing it. They never saw a dime of my money for Oblivion. But if I had not done that, they also would never have seen the $80 I later spent to buy Fallout 3 GOTY and Morrowind GOTY, and the $100 to $110 I still plan to spend buying Fallout New Vegas GOTY and Skyrim GOTY. If I had not borrowed that Oblivion game from my brother, I would never have bought it anyway, and they would only ever have seen the $50 my brother spent on the game. And they know this happens. Borrowing games is free advertisement that is more likely to cause people who can afford it to buy more of their later and earlier titles, if they don't suck, that is.

They know as well as anyone that DRM's do not stop pirates. And honestly, it doesn't stop friends from sharing game disks either. A 5 install limit is 3 to 5 friends in a college dorm, barracks, or family members in a house plus however many others will just share their computer during recreation. People share computers for recreational purposes because most aren't that stingy with their roommates. They share about as easily as they share CD's and DVD's.

DRM's are about control over the consumer to maximize their buying potential to increase profits. It has nothing to do with piracy.

If I owned a game company, we'd make all of our games with basic DRM's that had a limited shelf life. In other words, after a number of years, probably like 3 to 5, our DRM controls would expire either through a patch made available online or by a specific code. And guess what, it wouldn't even hurt us because we'd of likely have stopped even selling the game by then, and if not, borrowing amongst friends would only help in the final sales of the game when they saw them at bargain prices both used and new across the U.S in various gaming stores. I'd tell this to consumers as well so that they'd know that if they only wait 3 to 5 years, they can make as many working copies as they want, and do with them whatever they want except illegally sell personally made copies of them. And those that do, I'll leave it to the FBI to handle it because that's part of their job.

I don't think my profits would suffer either because pirates will always get past the DRM's, and legitimate consumers will buy my stuff when they see that it's good enough. My dream would be that my games were so good that people would play tem 10, even 20 years later on their dirt old XP, Vista, 7, and apple systems. And in order to make that a possibility, my DRM's would have to expire eventually.
 
Just the program itself.

You have to use alternative methods if you want to bypass the activation [kinda like when you rent a DVD movie and "rip" the protection while saving the contents to your hard drive].


Games are in another realm from movies and songs when it comes to copy protection. They are the backbone that has made the copy protection business so lucrative.

I've attempted to make back up copies of several games that I've purchased because I hold onto my games for years. I still have Age of Empires for crying out loud, and yes, I do have a back up copy of that that's also fairly worn out. It's a nightmare to back up games today. It's very difficult, the same method doesn't always work. There is no magic program that works with all games, and some protections are practically impossible without resorting to unsafe methods such as using cracks. In fact, I have one game, Borderlands GOTY that not only can I not make a backup copy of it, I can't even get the game to even work all due to the DRM. I donated, obviously, $50 to Gearbox and 2K Games. I've had that game for 6 months, the disk is already starting to get scratched, and I haven't even seen the intro yet.

All of this boils down to one thing. Control over the consumer to maximize profits. You're disk get's worn out or broken, you'll either buy the game again or you'll never enjoy it again. And you can't sell it to anyone because you can't even guarantee it works. You can give it away I suppose. I'll tell you one thing, I'm sure going to stay away from Gearbox and 2K games for a while, or at least until they come up with a better DRM plan.
 
If the activation limit is the same as Crysis, then it won't matter how many times you install it on the SAME machine [which sounds like it's linked to the Operating System Serial #].

It could be linked to the Mac Address of your network card, but more than likely it's linked to the serial numbers of a few things, your processor, video card, motherboard, network card, Mac Address allowing the change of a couple of those things, but not all of them before it reads it as another machine.

That means that whatever DRM program it installs, it reads the internals of your computer and sends that information out across the internet.

I'll tell you one game that attempts to allow us to get around the activation limit. Far Cry 2 allows us to revoke our activation with Securom, thereby allowing us to retain our activations. However, good luck getting it to work right. I had to email Securom a few times to tell them to give me back my activations because it didn't revoke right.
 
Really? Details? Does it get rid of the activation limit, or just the limit?

It probably only gets rid of the DRM Tages from your computer to avoid software conflicts and such. Sort of like the Securom removal tool. It gets rid of the DRM on your computer, but it reinstalls just as soon as you try and play the game again, either that, or you won't be able to play the game until you reinstall the DRM on your computer.
 
Back
Top