StarCraft II Gets DRM

[Dumac]

Originally posted by: Firsttime
I'm still wrapping my head around no LAN support. That is what made SC. SC was THE RTS LAN game for so long. DRM is just stupid. Screw this new Blizzard. Theirs games used to be genre defining. I'm having a hard time seeing SC2 do that.

Times have changed since then.

The piracy buzz is getting to the heads of developers. Blizzard, looking at WoW, realizes that a great way to avoid piracy and rake in big $$ is to make online and integral component of the game. They aren't going to notice if you or me take offense to it, as this game is guaranteed to rake in giant boatloads of cash, affirming their new mindset (not really new if you look at WoW, but new if you think Blizzard is the same company as the Diablo/SC days).

As far as being genre defining, I am sure neither SC2 or D3 will accomplish that. However, this isn't totally Blizzard's fault. SC and Diablo have such a following that diverging from what made SC and Diablo great would cause an uproar, despite the fact that being ambitious may result in a game even more amazing than the originals. People are already squabbling about the minor changes to the series in their new entries.

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: Dumac

Originally posted by: Firsttime
I'm still wrapping my head around no LAN support. That is what made SC. SC was THE RTS LAN game for so long. DRM is just stupid. Screw this new Blizzard. Theirs games used to be genre defining. I'm having a hard time seeing SC2 do that.

Times have changed since then.

The piracy buzz is getting to the heads of developers. Blizzard, looking at WoW, realizes that a great way to avoid piracy and rake in big $$ is to make online and integral component of the game. They aren't going to notice if you or me take offense to it, as this game is guaranteed to rake in giant boatloads of cash, affirming their new mindset (not really new if you look at WoW, but new if you think Blizzard is the same company as the Diablo/SC days).

As far as being genre defining, I am sure neither SC2 or D3 will accomplish that. However, this isn't totally Blizzard's fault. SC and Diablo have such a following that diverging from what made SC and Diablo great would cause an uproar, despite the fact that being ambitious may result in a game even more amazing than the originals. People are already squabbling about the minor changes to the series in their new entries.

:thumbsup:

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: adairusmc
Don't care.

Awesome :thumbsup:

 

[lupi]

I wasn't going to buy until a couple years down the road when the re-released the three seperate packages as an all in one title. Hopefully in that time some of this drm garbage also gets tossed with it.


And yeah, I can still resell my copy of 98, xp, or vista. A battrlenet tied account, not so much.

 

[Martimus]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: Martimus

Originally posted by: 69Mach1

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: 69Mach1
They've entered the realm of: Blow Me (I won't be buying)

And you must be so disappointed because right up until you found out it would have some form of DRM you were saving your pennies right? :roll:

No this was just the final nail in the coffin. I used to think Blizzard could do no wrong. Now I think otherwise. I'm sure plenty of people will buy anything they make, so I won't be missed.

This was likely the last nail in the coffin for me too. I had planned on buying the game, but I wasn't immensely excited about it. (SC1 was a good game, but not as fun as C&C or Red Alert at the time - for me at least) Seeing that I need to sign up for some sort of online account before I can even play the game is more hassle than it is worth for me. The lack of LAN support is another problem, as I generally avoid Multiplayer that isn't over a LAN (I grew tired of the immaturaty of people when you can't walk over and smack them.)

If they remove the need for a battle.net account, I will probably still buy the game and play the single player campaign. If they leave in that requirement, I doubt I will pick it up. The LAN issue is less important, as I don't have time to go out and play on a LAN as much as I used to.

do you play any games on steam?

No.

I do purchase a game when it goes on sale on Steam, and is very cheap, but it annoys me to all ends that I have this resourse hog that runs in the background with my games that causes it to be less stable. (Also, my internet isn't the most reliable, and getting games to run in offline mode is a royal pain in the ass.) I never play any game for a prolonged period of time on Steam, and the only way they can get me to buy a game on that service is to have it really cheap. (Then I can put up with the annoyances of the service, in exchange for the low price of the game.)

EDIT: Also we aren't talking about Steam. Steam is a similar system, but it is a system I have already signed up for, and it was a PAIN IN THE ASS to sign up to! It is the biggest reason I feel the way I do about signing up for another online account for an offline singleplayer game. Steam would cause my system to crash constantly when it first came out, and it never worked properly for around 5 years (I was unable to access the steam store, or change around settings, and I often had to uninstall the service and reinstall it multiple times to get a game to work ... ) It has sense been patched multiple times, and seems to be stable, but I don't need to sign up for another service, and maybe go through the same headaches I did with Steam. I am sorry, I am not going to do it. It is a game, and is supposed to be entertaining, not frustrating.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: Elcs
Dawn of War 2 had this with GFWL/Steam. It ended up being a non-issue to most people.

Most but not all. I'd love to resell my copy of DoW2, but I can't. I'm not into multiplayer on this game, so there is pretty much no value left in the game for me.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: Necrolezbeast
I really don't think I will ever need to reinstall a game more than a few times (if I do I can crack it at that point an not feel bad cause I PURCHASED said item), and I am not too ignorant to see that these companies want to make money and not have every asshat steal their work.

You do realize the irony that the "asshat" who enables others to steal IP, are the same folks that enable you to enjoy your purchased game into perpetuity?

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: exdeath

Originally posted by: Sylvanas
Is it so hard to play a multiplayer game over Bnet instead of LAN....- it's not destroying multiplayer. It's fine QQ

Until Bliz can guarantee that lag.net performs as well as my LAN... no LAN no buy.

With what Blizzard has been doing to WoW lately (micromanaging everything) and eliminating LAN from a game solely as an anti piracy measure, I have no problem boycotting Blizzard products altogether.

It would be interesting if their netcode just did the matchmaking on b.net and then the transfer between players was negotiated to minimize lag (aka transfer most of the game data over your internal LAN).

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: Onita
If this were any other company but Blizzard, shit would be hitting the fan right now.

I was saying this about HL2 and Valve years ago too when Steam came out.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: AyashiKaibutsu

Originally posted by: loki8481
I'm sure this will cause problems for a small number of people, but at the end of the day, I blame the pirates for making companies do this, not the companies themselves.

it's a business and I can't blame them for trying to do everything they can to ensure that their product isn't stolen en mass.

If they created death squads to go out and hunt software pirates would you not blame them? Now, that you admit there are cases that aren't excusable maybe you can blame companies for doing everything they can to hassle paying customers and remove their rights (first-sale) while not affecting pirates at all in the false name of stopping pirates.

Yes, I see piracy as the scapegoat and a means to implement draconian DRM and effectively eliminate the 2nd hand market for games.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: NaOH
Example makes no sense because your car doesn't drive on the internet. It doesn't have anything to do with the internet. This is akin to someone needing to activate a gift card by calling the number on the back. Pure and simple. Explain how it's a roadblock.

I fail to see what the Internet has to do with my single player campaign, the LAN play that was omitted, or the ability to resell what I own. If I want (keyword: want) to use b.net, then I'll play by Blizzard's rules and accept their terms. I refuse to be yoked into the way they want me to use my property without putting up a fight however.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: NaOH
This DRM thing has gotten out of hand. When people freak out and immediately declare that they won't buy something because it infringes on their "freedoms". Without taking into account what DRM method is being used. Games have had DRM on them for ages.

and for ages you never had to worry about install limits, having an internet connection, or the ability to sell your owned property to someone.

Exactly, when the consumer quits pushing back against ever increasingly draconian DRM schemes, we end up where we are today. We'll end up must worse in the future if we continue down the path of acceptance and inaction.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: golem

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: golem

and for ages you never had to worry about install limits, having an internet connection, or the ability to sell your owned property to someone.

Well to be fair, for ages developers didn't have to worry about 0-day warez, pirates being able to download a game in an hour etc etc.

and in those days it was easier for the average user to bypass any installed protection features.

Maybe I'm not understanding what you are saying. But if it was easier to bypass protection features back then, doesn't that mean the newer protection features are working?

No, it's just harder for the pirates, but it's still an ineffective measure. Also, the side effect is that legitimate customers are caught in the crossfire of the pirates vs game companies arms race. The only people being evermore inconvenienced throughout this arms race are paying consumers IMO.

 

[stlcardinals]

Originally posted by: lupi
And yeah, I can still resell my copy of 98, xp, or vista. A battrlenet tied account, not so much.

If they are retail copies, you can sell the media, not your license. OEM, you can resell them with the machine they are tied too.

The license you cannot resell.

edit: typo

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: stlcardinals

Originally posted by: lupi
And yeah, I can still resell my copy of 98, xp, or vista. A battrlenet tied account, not so much.

If they are retail copies, you can sell the media, not your license. OEM, you can resell them with the machine they are tied too.

The license you cannot resell.

edit: typo

I'm pretty sure the license is fully transferable. Only stipulation is that the license can only be used for one PC at any given point in time.

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: Martimus
I don't need to sign up for another service, and maybe go through the same headaches I did with Steam. I am sorry, I am not going to do it. It is a game, and is supposed to be entertaining, not frustrating.

QTF

 

[lupi]

Originally posted by: Golgatha

Originally posted by: golem

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: golem

and for ages you never had to worry about install limits, having an internet connection, or the ability to sell your owned property to someone.

Well to be fair, for ages developers didn't have to worry about 0-day warez, pirates being able to download a game in an hour etc etc.

and in those days it was easier for the average user to bypass any installed protection features.

Maybe I'm not understanding what you are saying. But if it was easier to bypass protection features back then, doesn't that mean the newer protection features are working?

No, it's just harder for the pirates, but it's still an ineffective measure. Also, the side effect is that legitimate customers are caught in the crossfire of the pirates vs game companies arms race. The only people being evermore inconvenienced throughout this arms race are paying consumers IMO.

yep, in previous generations you could just about have the casual player accidentally bypass such features. Now it takes a little more knowledge to do the defeat, but they will all be defeated and anyone who cares can find and apply them.

 

[Scrodes]

AFAK Bnet is going to go through a major overhaul to reduce latency etc. So "LAN" via Bnet may not be an issue at all. As for now Bnet is about as user friendly and feature rich as DOS

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: Scrodes
AFAK Bnet is going to go through a major overhaul to reduce latency etc. So "LAN" via Bnet may not be an issue at all. As for now Bnet is about as user friendly and feature rich as DOS

What I love most on Anandtech: Brilliant lurkers.

 

[nerp]

Originally posted by: NaOH
This DRM thing has gotten out of hand. When people freak out and immediately declare that they won't buy something because it infringes on their "freedoms". Without taking into account what DRM method is being used. Games have had DRM on them for ages.

Meanwhile they happily sign away their rights in every aspect of their lives that has actual MEANING haha. All this over a video game. God forbid one of these gamers ever signs a major contract. OMG MY RIIIGHTS.

As others have said, don't like it? Don't buy it. That's your right. Creators have rights to decide the licensing term. And they have to follow consumer protection laws and standards when they write those terms.

 

[lupi]

lol, in what could only be called an epic duh! moment. At blizzcon one of the blizz guys talks about how hot starcraft is/was and describes it being played in game cafes. Something which I imagine is gonna be hard to do with the required bnet authentication per copy.

 

[Dorkenstein]

Originally posted by: nerp

Originally posted by: NaOH
This DRM thing has gotten out of hand. When people freak out and immediately declare that they won't buy something because it infringes on their "freedoms". Without taking into account what DRM method is being used. Games have had DRM on them for ages.

Meanwhile they happily sign away their rights in every aspect of their lives that has actual MEANING haha. All this over a video game. God forbid one of these gamers ever signs a major contract. OMG MY RIIIGHTS.

As others have said, don't like it? Don't buy it. That's your right. Creators have rights to decide the licensing term. And they have to follow consumer protection laws and standards when they write those terms.

Whatever makes you feel better. I think most people that squawk over games and DRM do it because they've hit their tolerance everywhere else, and the unreasonable DRM is the straw that breaks the camel's back. True, the old saying "Don't like it, go elsewhere" still works. But eventually, what if there's nowhere else to go? In any case, Mega-Developers can keep pushing the line in the sand further and further towards us simply due to the fact that people keep jumping back to stay on their side.

 

[KMFJD]

Originally posted by: lupi
lol, in what could only be called an epic duh! moment. At blizzcon one of the blizz guys talks about how hot starcraft is/was and describes it being played in game cafes. Something which I imagine is gonna be hard to do with the required bnet authentication per copy.

Just because you cannot imagine how it will work does not mean Blizzard is not capable of this.

 

[Pantlegz]

I guess I don't understand why people are so against DRM. why is it so bad for a company to stop people from stealing their work? And the people that cry about 'signing up for another service' or 'got headaches with xxx's DRM/platform' are stupid, how hard is it to type in your e-mail and the same password? Really? OMG, they took 20 seconds of my life! I say good for them, steal someone else's shit! I don't care I'll buy 4 copies of the game, just because the DRM is so awesome. That or I have 4 computers I want to play on and feel that the company deserves to be paid for their work.

I say we unDRM these whiners paychecks and just let anyone steal the money they work so hard for and see how they feel about DRM then.

lol, in what could only be called an epic duh! moment. At blizzcon one of the blizz guys talks about how hot starcraft is/was and describes it being played in game cafes. Something which I imagine is gonna be hard to do with the required bnet authentication per copy.

game cafe's don't have internet connections? You cant make a private, or password protected game? Oh you're retarded? Or just want to cry about something? stfu!

 

[Dorkenstein]

The "un-drm the whiners' paychecks" statement is utter numbsdom. Not only does it not make any realistic sense, but even if it did, what purpose would it serve to punish the people who put food on the game developers tables? Don't common working class people deserve to be paid for THEIR work? Terrible illustration.