ORIGIN - Won't let me play my game - Exceeded Installs!

[PowerYoga]

Just because its been around for a long time doesn't mean it makes sense or is the right thing to do. You bought the game, it's not like you're leasing it.

 

[Anteaus]

You bought the game, it's not like you're leasing it.

Actually leasing is exactly what your doing. They own the software. You are purchasing an indefinite license to use said software as provisioned in the license agreement. It's a important distinction that has been creating havoc for many years.

 

[Maximilian]

Why do people think games on Steam don't have activation limits? A few of them do, Crysis Warhead was one of them, albeit Securom style; it has if not mistaken, been patched to remove the limit too.
http://store.steampowered.com/app/17330/
Look below the Metascore on right hand side.

SunnyD is right, been like this for a few years, since Spore came out I believe; they were the first if I'm not mistaken.

People hold steam in higher regards than other services like origin for good reason.

Origin is from EA, the activation limits and added BS is also from EA, so EA went out of their way and added in this crap.

Steam is from valve, the activation limits and added BS is from a 3rd party so valve and steam had nothing to do with it.

"3rd-party DRM: SecuROM™
5 machine activation limit"

Steamworks is the best kind of DRM as afaik no steamworks game does this activation limit BS. Steam is still far far ahead of origin in this area. Sure steam will sell games that have this added crap, that dosent make steam a bad service though. In fact steam is trying to help gamers by offering its much better and far less intrusive steamworks as an alternative. Dont see EA doing anything like that. Ive said it before and ill say it again, fuck EA.

 

[Raduque]

They resolved the issue.

The Rep wasn't even aware of the limitation. Said "That's weird" and had to go check on it once I gave him my details.

That's good they fixed it for you.

For future reference, EA provides tools to deauthorize your computers that are authorized installs.

 

[Cerb]

Actually leasing is exactly what your doing. They own the software. You are purchasing an indefinite license to use said software as provisioned in the license agreement. It's a important distinction that has been creating havoc for many years.

And that is a good reason to buy a physical copy. Then you have, in fact, bought a copy, not some BS license, and the EULA during install holds no meaningful weight.

 

[Ackmed]

You dont need to apologize to sunnyd, he was the jerk in the thread jumping on you.

And yet no one bitches to Microsoft when their Windows key fails due to too many activations... :hmm:

Oh wait!

Can we find something reasonable to bitch about for once? This has been the norm in the industry for YEARS now.

Never happened to me on steam. So norm? Not so much. Origin just sucks.

 

[Anteaus]

And that is a good reason to buy a physical copy. Then you have, in fact, bought a copy, not some BS license, and the EULA during install holds no meaningful weight.

All copies are licensed, whether it comes on a disc or not. You do own the media it comes on tho, which is why First Sale Doctrine rights are protected for physical media and not on electronic purchases.

It's the same for movies and music also. Otherwise, you'd be able to copy and reproduce all you wanted. It's ALL licensed.

 

[Throckmorton]

And yet no one bitches to Microsoft when their Windows key fails due to too many activations... :hmm:

Oh wait!

Can we find something reasonable to bitch about for once? This has been the norm in the industry for YEARS now.

Uh no, it's not the norm. Steam doesn't do this.

 

[Throckmorton]

I had this happen with DigitalRiver. Test Drive Unlimited. I had to get a whole new damn key, and for a long time both Atari and DigitalRiver said they couldn't help me and to try the other.

 

[HeXen]

Go do a search for "Activation limit" and look over the last few YEARS of posts. You'll see it's a rather popular topic.

Now, here's a question for you - when you "rebuilt/reloaded" your PC, did you bother UNINSTALLING the applications in question? Or did you just wipe/reload thereby likely bypassing and DEACTIVATION method the titles may have had in order to free up the activation count?

And apparently you DON'T only use steam, lest you wouldn't have this issue.

Seriously, chiding me on a topic that has been bandied to death over the years is pretty childish. Your ignorance isn't a reason to belittle others, particularly ones that have the correct answer. Stop trying to make yourself look like a subject matter expert when you clearly aren't. If you were, you wouldn't have posted this in the first place.

So are you like pro activation limit or what? why would anyone debate the subject, blame the consumer as ignorant as if their really in favor of something that does not benefit consumers, especially hobbiests?

Its not his job to go searching for a subject he didn't realize was a subject to begin with. A consumer should beable to have certain reasonable expectations when buying or licensing a product.
Its not like there is ever a big banner that states "hey consumer, your only allowed xx amount of activations" before you buy something.
If anyone had to analyze every "what if" scenerio before they buy anything, no one would bother purchasing anything.

 

[BladeVenom]

And yet no one bitches to Microsoft when their Windows key fails due to too many activations... :hmm:

I've complained about that.

 

[Pacman4]

Why do some people on forums accept these idiotic limitations?
Games companies continue to do things that constantly annoy the consumer, and yet there's always people ready to ridicule any complaints made.

It seems like some people either work in the industry or are in awe of the might of the corporations and have lost the backbone to stand up to them.

 

[NoSoup4You]

Is Origin as good as Steam? Clearly no. Would I be using it if BF3 was on Steam, hell no.

But the bottom line is all this guy had to do was pick up the phone to get it fixed, not the end of the world. I have no problem with a company saying, "hey, eight times in under 12 months... without ever uninstalling to deactivate the license... really??" That's weird, man. Eight times, I have no problem with Origin requiring you to just pick up the phone to get it fixed. It's not like Origin/EA is in the business of selling a product and then taking it away arbitrarily. Despite what the fear mongers on the internet would have you believe...

 

[Born2bwire]

And yet no one bitches to Microsoft when their Windows key fails due to too many activations... :hmm:

Oh wait!

Can we find something reasonable to bitch about for once? This has been the norm in the industry for YEARS now.

Except all it took for me to clear up the Windows activation was a phone call...

 

[SunnyD]

Except all it took for me to clear up the Windows activation was a phone call...

And lo! The OP did the same thing and imagine that, it worked!

Uh no, it's not the norm. Steam doesn't do this.

If you bothered to read further into the thread, this has already been discussed. Further discussed prior, yet I'll rehash it yet again because I like to hear myself talk: "Steam" may not do this, but there have been titles on Steam using 3rd party DRM that has.

So are you like pro activation limit or what? why would anyone debate the subject, blame the consumer as ignorant as if their really in favor of something that does not benefit consumers, especially hobbiests?

Its not his job to go searching for a subject he didn't realize was a subject to begin with. A consumer should beable to have certain reasonable expectations when buying or licensing a product.
Its not like there is ever a big banner that states "hey consumer, your only allowed xx amount of activations" before you buy something.
If anyone had to analyze every "what if" scenerio before they buy anything, no one would bother purchasing anything.

I'm pro not bitching about it. I'm pro being proactive as well.

 

[HeXen]

I'm pro not bitching about it. I'm pro being proactive as well.

your right, instead your pro bitching about people bitching. Which is actually worse cause unlike the OP, yours is easily solved by exiting any such threads. Meanwhile his, is a reflection of frustration from millions of consumers every year.

 

[SunnyD]

your right, instead your pro bitching about people bitching. Which is actually worse cause unlike the OP, yours is easily solved by exiting any such threads. Meanwhile his, is a reflection of frustration from millions of consumers every year.

And now you're bitching about me bitching about the op bitching, which is doubly worse and can be easily solved by ignoring me. We can do this ad infinitum you know.

However, I will indulge you and answer your original question: As a developer myself, I can understand the desire for things like activation limits, among other more "obtrusive" measures. Personally, I think activation limits are an acceptable middle-ground in the supposed war against piracy. It requires activity by both the consumer AND the company, meaning the company itself is burdened just as much by having to take that phone call or answer that email. It serves as a check toward the legitimacy of the product and it's supposed owner. And it's by far the least invasive into the privacy of the end-user's rights.

My job is to ensure the software licensing for the software my company develops is followed, to develop measures to/and combat potential piracy. Granted, the scales and industries are somewhat different - monetarily by an several orders of magnitude for just one license. But the end result is the same. When you're talking potentially losing millions of dollars a year (and meaning my head will roll and I won't have a job at the end of the day), I understand completely the situation. As a consumer myself, it's disturbing some of the hoops we have to jump through, and how knee-jerk some developer/publisher reactions are. But I do have perspective on the issue at hand.

 

[Cerb]

All copies are licensed, whether it comes on a disc or not. You do own the media it comes on tho, which is why First Sale Doctrine rights are protected for physical media and not on electronic purchases.

It's the same for movies and music also. Otherwise, you'd be able to copy and reproduce all you wanted. It's ALL licensed.

No, it's not. There is a sale. You are bound by copyright law, and anything more they want to say about it after the fact holds no weight. That there is any specific license is a fiction the media companies like to have people believe.

If you agree to terms about such things before you purchase, then that no longer applies, and you are getting a license to use the software, with specific terms.

And now you're bitching about me bitching about the op bitching, which is doubly worse and can be easily solved by ignoring me. We can do this ad infinitum you know.

However, I will indulge you and answer your original question: As a developer myself, I can understand the desire for things like activation limits, among other more "obtrusive" measures. Personally, I think activation limits are an acceptable middle-ground in the supposed war against piracy. It requires activity by both the consumer AND the company, meaning the company itself is burdened just as much by having to take that phone call or answer that email. It serves as a check toward the legitimacy of the product and it's supposed owner. And it's by far the least invasive into the privacy of the end-user's rights.

Why not have indefinite activations, but only the latest one actually be active? IE, I buy game X, and I get a unique key. I tie that key to myself. Now, I can play all day long, and install over and over again, as long as I use that key, and some other identifying credentials. Upon new activation, prior activations become non-functional; or, for multiplayer-heavy games, only one use of a key at a time would be allowed, but multiple installs could be. Unless someone tries to use your key and credentials while you still have it tied to yourself, no email or phone call will be needed.

Granted, the above will work best for multiplayer-heavy games, since there will be an added incentive to have a legitimate copy for online play.

Activation limits won't stop piracy, though, because pirates will just remove that feature.

 

[HeXen]

My job is to ensure the software licensing for the software my company develops is followed, to develop measures to/and combat potential piracy. Granted, the scales and industries are somewhat different - monetarily by an several orders of magnitude for just one license. But the end result is the same. When you're talking potentially losing millions of dollars a year (and meaning my head will roll and I won't have a job at the end of the day), I understand completely the situation. As a consumer myself, it's disturbing some of the hoops we have to jump through, and how knee-jerk some developer/publisher reactions are. But I do have perspective on the issue at hand.

got the answer i originally asked. So you are pro limited activations. Although you do realize there are plenty of other ways to combat piracy than limit activations.
Steam has done fine. i have never heard of a company going belly up because they did not limit the number of activations per user. Origin has plenty of other means within itself just like Steam has, to maintain that a user is not giving out his copy to others. Now actual hacking and pirating...sorry but limiting activations is far, far from slowing that down, you can't stop it and that is that. Instead you offer a service thats convenient with appropriate checks not infringeing on the user or limting them. limits only pose issues and causes more piracy.

Angry customers=pirate/bad word of mouth/boycott..etc
happy customers= purchases/loyalty/high praise...etc.

Either way, you already proved my point in that regard. and i think all the general valid points on how limited activations suck have already been established. dunno bout rest of ya, but i'm moving on from this one.

 

[SunnyD]

Activation limits won't stop piracy, though, because pirates will just remove that feature.

limits only pose issues and causes more piracy.

Angry customers=pirate/bad word of mouth/boycott..etc
happy customers= purchases/loyalty/high praise...etc.

Either way, you already proved my point in that regard. and i think all the general valid points on how limited activations suck have already been established. dunno bout rest of ya, but i'm moving on from this one.

I'm going to touch on both of these at once, since they both will garner the exact same response:

You're both absolutely right. There's the minor issue of having to actively protect your intellectual property in order to maintain copyright. But more importantly, this is something that developers (and the music/movie industry) haven't realized yet.

It's in the same vein as antivirus/malware protection. Companies can only be reactive to the situation at hand. There's a problem (piracy), and they're reacting to try to curb it in order to realize revenue from those potential lost sales. The only problem is that they haven't developed a method that customers will be totally happy about, because the only thing that will make all customers happy is 100% freedom - and that runs totally contrary to generating 100% revenue from every unit out there in the wild.

Like I said, I myself am a consumer of PC Games. I am, however, sympathetic to what the industry is trying to do, even if I'm not very receptive to the methods they may be using to accomplish it. I personally think consumers in general should try to understand both sides of the coin before they go off on the companies full bull.

 

[Via]

I had this happen with DigitalRiver. Test Drive Unlimited. I had to get a whole new damn key, and for a long time both Atari and DigitalRiver said they couldn't help me and to try the other.

So I'm not alone?

TDU has been giving me hell ever since I bought it from D2D. It ran fine for about a week or two, but then it started asking me for the code every time I started it. And then, about a week later, it said I was out of activations.

D2D was cooperative about it and has given me two manual unlock codes. But now my game is fubar for some reason: whenever I access to map to find challenges the descriptions are absent. I haven't been able to fix it and have pretty much given up on it. I have to believe it's some sort of DRM failsafe.

And I guess that's probably what they wanted all along: my money, and then attrition me until I shut the fuck up.

So frustrating.

 

[Anteaus]

No, it's not. There is a sale. You are bound by copyright law, and anything more they want to say about it after the fact holds no weight. That there is any specific license is a fiction the media companies like to have people believe.

If you agree to terms about such things before you purchase, then that no longer applies, and you are getting a license to use the software, with specific terms.

The license is implied. I'm not going to debate about the fallacy of that statement except to say you should go study the US copyright law as well as the DMCA. The fact that money is exchanged at point of sale doesn't change anything. There are specific passages that deal with how the license is transferred to the new owner if you sell the media, and that is simply because while you don't own the software (which is not intrinsic), you own the media it was provided on (which is intrinsic).

You are correct in that parts of the EULA are not legal in many of the states they are used in, but even if the EULA was nonexistant you're still bound by copyright law, which by definition means you don't own it.

It's your prerogative whether you believe anything I say so I'll just leave it at that.

 

[Throckmorton]

So I'm not alone?

TDU has been giving me hell ever since I bought it from D2D. It ran fine for about a week or two, but then it started asking me for the code every time I started it. And then, about a week later, it said I was out of activations.

D2D was cooperative about it and has given me two manual unlock codes. But now my game is fubar for some reason: whenever I access to map to find challenges the descriptions are absent. I haven't been able to fix it and have pretty much given up on it. I have to believe it's some sort of DRM failsafe.

And I guess that's probably what they wanted all along: my money, and then attrition me until I shut the fuck up.

So frustrating.

Oh yeah it was D2D not DigitalRiver. I finally got it working and then the servers were constantly down... so I gave up.

 

[Throckmorton]

The license is implied. I'm not going to debate about the fallacy of that statement except to say you should go study the US copyright law as well as the DMCA. The fact that money is exchanged at point of sale doesn't change anything. There are specific passages that deal with how the license is transferred to the new owner if you sell the media, and that is simply because while you don't own the software (which is not intrinsic), you own the media it was provided on (which is intrinsic).

You are correct in that parts of the EULA are not legal in many of the states they are used in, but even if the EULA was nonexistant you're still bound by copyright law, which by definition means you don't own it.

It's your prerogative whether you believe anything I say so I'll just leave it at that.

But you have the right to use your license, which they infringe upon with this "DRM" garbage. We don't want to reengineer our games, just play them

 

[Cerb]

you own the media it was provided on (which is intrinsic).

Exactly. I'm buying a copy, and have all the rights associated with that.

You are correct in that parts of the EULA are not legal in many of the states they are used in,

It's not merely that parts of the EULA would be void, but that agreement to it needs to occur before you fork your money over for it to matter. While no one has tried taking on shrink-wrap licenses and similar, it's hard to imagine them not being valid, honestly. The closest to a straight, "is a EULA valid," case I know of was this one.

but even if the EULA was nonexistant you're still bound by copyright law, which by definition means you don't own it.

For that definition of it, the work itself, no one owns it. The whole point of copyright is that creative efforts are not an ownable things, but the creators should have a way of controlling their works for some time. And, that was just my point, but sorry, IANAL: you agree to only a little more than to not pirate it, plagiarize it, or distribute derivative works (though there is usually implied or explicit permission to make free mods to games), when you buy a copy.